1 

## Responses to Comments on the Proposed Revisions to Lead Ambient Air Monitoring Requirements

Docket Number OAR-2006-0735 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

December 20102



## Table of Contents

Introduction ......................................

................................................... ............................................ 3 Comments on the Proposed Emission Threshold .......

................................................... ................. 4 Comments on Monitoring at Airports ................

................................................... ...................... 230 Comments on Non-Source-Oriented Monitoring ........

................................................... ............ 245 Comments on Monitoring Deployment Schedule.........

................................................... ........... 252 Comments on Other Aspects of Lead Monitoring ......

................................................... ............. 2583



## Introduction

This document, together with the preamble to the fi nal rule on the revisions to the monitoring requirements for lead, presents the responses of th e Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to the public comments received on EPA’s proposal of D ecember 20, 2009, proposing revisions to the monitoring requirements for lead. All significa nt issues raised in timely public comments have been addressed. Where comments were submitted after the close of the public comment period, EPA has responded to the extent feasible.
The responses presented in this document are intend ed to augment the responses to comments that appear in the preamble to the final rule by address ing comments that are not discussed in the preamble to the final rule. All comments received a re presented; however, the reader is referred to the preamble to the final rule for responses to com ments that are addressed in the preamble. All issues on which the Administrator is taking final a ction in the revisions to the lead monitoring requirements final rule are addressed in the rulema king record. Accordingly, this Response to Comments document, together with the preamble to th e final rule, the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, and other docketed supporting documents should be considered collectively as EPA’s response to all of the significant comments s ubmitted on EPA’s 2009 proposed revisions to the monitoring requirements for lead.4



## Comments on the Proposed Emission Threshold

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6155
Name: C. Barker Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. PROFIT DOES NOT TRUMP CLEAN AIR Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6154
Name: I. Thomas Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. It is time we put the affects of our environment on our health in the lime light and make being healthy consumers a priority. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6153
Name: C. Girz Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Lead has been known t o be a toxin for many decades. Please protect the health of the citizens of this nation by enforcing monitoring of this dangerous substance. Response: Responded to in preamble.5 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6152
Name: C. Clearwater Organization: Comment: What is more important? People's health or corporate profits? I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require mon itoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per yea r (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and wel l being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulner able to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6151 Name: C. Bylinowski Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Help save us from the short-sightedness of the previous administration. Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health an d well being of our community, especially our children who are particul arly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Lead is very dangerous. I w ork for an urban agriculture organization. We and anyone trying to grow food in the city deals with our legacy of lead pollution. We don't need any more in the air or in the ground! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6150

Name: C. Barrett Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. For the environment a nd how our children live healthier in it! Please act! Response: Responded to in preamble.6 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6149
Name: C. Reid Organization: Comment: I heartily support the statement below. It is in all of our best interests to return to stronger rules which protect the healt h and well-being of people and all living things which inhabit this country. We ne ed to be able to count on the EPA to keep the public safe and to act in the best interests of public health. Thank you. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules t o require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6144 Name: K. Raymond Organization:
Comment: We live less than 100 miles downwind from one of the largest coal-fired power plants in the country, in NW New M exico. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any fac ility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Mon itoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. This issue has a huge potential impact on our commu nity of Pagosa Springs, as well as many other neighboring communities. Please implement these rules! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6145 Name: L. Ewing Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. you/we must clean up our acts!7 Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6137 Name: G. Bartning Organization: Comment: Without the EPA to act as a watchdog and p rotect us from the airborne pollutant, there is little that we can do. It is imperative that the EPA acts in the interest of the greater public good ver sus industrial good. This will help us in the long run ( it is far cheaper to make things cleaner to begin with than to clean up after the fact). It will help the health of American worker, citizens and environment. It will save from healthc are costs and lawsuit. Please act now! Response: No response needed.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6135 Name: K. Hoogenakker Organization:
Comment: E.P.A. --- It stands for Environmental Pro tection Agency, in case anyone's forgotten. If the EPA is going to cave to industry pressure and fail to monitor air pollution that puts American's health a nd wellness at risk, they might as well close their doors for good. Time to g row a pair and do the job that needs to be done. Change can happen, one brave pers on at a time. Thank you. Response: No response needed.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6136 Name: K. Kleyboecker Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Work for the people o f the U.S. not the lobbyists. Response: Responded to in preamble.8 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6142
Name: K. Kraft Organization: Comment: Please protect our children. I strongly ur ge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6141
Name: D. Hileman Organization: Comment: Come on guys, take the right path for us. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility t hat emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring thi s dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6139

Name: C. Hart Organization: Comment: Why is this even a question? Don't you car e about the air? Why would anyone think putting lead in the air is anyth ing but criminal? I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring a t any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy) . Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6138
Name: G. Gardner9 Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. We used to live near a freeway in Los Angeles when my son was born. We moved to Massachusetts whe n he was 15 months but that short exposure did a lot of damage. Despit e the fact that he was never exposed to any lead paint in his life, at age three when he was exhibiting problems it was shown that the levels of lead in hi s blood were high. He has significant behavioral problems even today and he i s now 11 years old. We must reverse this trend immediately. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6147
Name: C. Amsden Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. I will be graduating from the Colorado School of Mines within 6 months with a degree in metallurgy a nd will most likely spend my life working in large scale factories and/or sme lting plants and it is blatantly obvious that monitoring all emissions, including le ad, should be done so with the utmost care and regard to the health and safety of workers and the general public despite any additional costs that may be imp osed on the companies operating said facilities or any other liable parti es. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6096
Name: S. Wilson Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Please consider this important monitoring for the10 well-being of our children. Thank you for your cons ideration. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6169 Name: A. Leighton Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. We must certainly do all we can to support industry and jobs in America, but not at the cost of the hea lth and well-being of the citizenry. Stricter monitoring of harmful pollutant s such as lead will encourage industry to clean up its act (literally), and will be of substantial benefit to the community at large. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6168

Name: S. Eatenson Organization: Comment: Financial interests continue to deny, igno re, and generally discount concerns about air (and water, and soil) pollution. The EPA is our only way to insist that standards are raised, tightened, and st rictly enforced. We have the right not to be sickened and killed by companies th at claim to be serving us. Please, act in our behalf, and refuse to be bought off. Otherwise, you're just as bad as them. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6167
Name: A. Cockrell Organization:11 Comment: PLEASE, our world is fragile. We do not ne ed more LEAD. I ask as a biology major and science teacher as well as a pa rent and grandparent. THANKS strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to requ ire monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6166
Name: P. Leaf Organization: Comment: Several years ago, my daughter had elevate d lead levels and had to have repeated blood tests to monitor her health. Th is lasted almost two years and there was no "point source" responsible. The la st thing we need is more ambient lead contamination in the air our children breath. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any fac ility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Mon itoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6165

Name: C. Daum Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. The EPA should have t he health of Americans at heart, and not let polluting factories continue to worsen air and water quality. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6164

Name: B. Carter12 Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. In my humble opinion enacting strong airborne lead monitoring standards will reduce both the occu rrences of many cancers and autism. To refuse to do so would be an act of t reachery against the people of the United States. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6163
Name: I. Kleiman Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Dangerous levels of l ead in the air that our children breathe are unacceptable. Is it worth saving a few dollars and allowing our children's IQs to be lower. Does being dumber help us to compete in the global marketplace? Sheesh! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6156 Name: D. Roy Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. PROFIT DOES NOT TRUMP CLEAN AIR Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-609513 Name: S. Bykowski Organization: Comment: I believe the EPA must create rules to req uire monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy): facilities such as factories and smelting plants. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6134

Name: K. E. Cowen Organization: Comment: Truly, lead emissions have no place in our atmosphere-- even at half a ton per year-- and I hope to see the day when we eliminate all lead emissions. Until then, I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6097 Name: G. Crosby Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits airborne lead. Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve your personal health and well being of your community, especially your children who are particularly vulnerable to th e risks posed by lead toxicity. Gated communities might keep out the "little people ," but they cannot filter the toxins we all breath. Response: Monitoring at all sources of Pb is both i mpractical (there are well over 100,000 facilities that emit some amount of Pb ) and unjustifiable. Very small sources of Pb have no potential to exceed the Pb NAAQS which was established at a level that protects public health with a margin of safety. The emission threshold finalized in this rule is intend ed to identify sources of Pb that have the potential to exceed the Pb NAAQS.14 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6061
Name: A. Grodin Organization: Comment: As a mother and grandmother, I am writing to urge you to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that em its more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this d angerous pollution will improve the health and well being of my community a nd your own community, especially to all of our children who are particula rly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6160
Name: S. Valenti Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. I live in the lead be lt and know the potential harm that lax standards can do to people, especially chi ldren. We must solve problems now and not continue to pass them down the road. The road is already blocked. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6159
Name: S. Klein Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. It will also cut heal th care costs at the front end, by allowing us all to be healthier. This is real healt h care, not disease care. Response: Responded to in preamble.15 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6158 Name: M Vargas Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Please take this oppo rtunity to undo one of the many wrongs done by the Bush administration. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6130

Name: B. Warner Organization: Comment: Please do not ignore the health and develo pment of our next generation for the bottom line of corporate pollute rs. As someone who worked to implement a federal lead-based paint hazard redu ction program in my community, I am acutely aware of what small amounts of lead can do to the well-being and functioning of small children. Monit oring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per yea r should be established immediately. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6157

Name: B. Stanton Organization: Comment: Clean up our air!! I wholeheartedly urge t he EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.16 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6162
Name: W. Collins Organization: Comment: I think anyone putting any lead in the air or on the ground or in the water ought to be highly discouraged from doing so. I'm not so sure that monitoring is the best way to control anything as i t seems to amount to, "Keep doing it while we watch." More monitoring probably means more budget and more staff. Maybe there is a way to create a kind o f permit-by-rule monitoring exemption for these lower emissions. The assumption is that they will emit even if monitored, so take any money savings by not monitoring, including estimated fees that each polluter would typically p ay to consultants to collect data and prepare reports, and use that money instea d to fund pollution controls. Otherwise, I say monitor any facility that emits mo re than a quarter ton of airborne lead per year (.25 tpy). Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6115
Name: K. Kahn Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring and obtaining information of this pollut ant is needed to ensure that we maintain and improve the health and well being o f our community, especially our children who are particularly vulner able to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6102
Name: B. J. Nekola Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. How can big business consistently ignore the health needs of people, especially children! It bog gles my mind as the young folks say. Take care of the environment - it cannot be repaired.17 Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6103
Name: D. Williams Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollutant will improve th e health and well-being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Airborne lead is toxi c and can cause a host of medical problems, especially in children who are mo re susceptible to the harmful effects of lead exposure. Some of the probl ems it causes include lower IQ, behavioral problems, brain damage, kidney damag e and cardiovascular injury. This is not a future I wish upon my progeny

. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6118
Name: K. Schockmel Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. I live in a small rur al Utah valley and we have the WORST air pollution in the nation this winter. I am painfully aware of the effects of poor air quality on all citizens - espec ially children. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6104
Name: S. Sesher Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the18 risks posed by lead toxicity. The more we study the effects of Lead in the body, the stronger the conclusion that there is no safe l evel of lead exposure. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6105
Name: M. Bohnert Organization:
Comment: I live near the Doe Run lead smelter in He rculaneum, MO. I'm tired of hearing about people having their lawns dug up d ue to lead contamination, and children with high lead levels in their blood. This must be stopped. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require mon itoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per yea r (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and wel l being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulner able to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6106
Name: A. Ricci Organization: Comment: Lead is not something I want to breathe in my air. Just because corporations can make more money if I do breathe th e air does not mean I want that to happen. I strongly urge the EPA to enact ru les to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of air borne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6132
Name: C. Williams Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy).19 Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. MY SON SUFFERS FROM L EAD POISONING FROM POLLUTION IN ANOTHER COUNTRY. PLEASE DO NOT ALLOW IT HERE ! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6116 Name: J. and M. De Jonghe Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. This is after all, wh at environmental protection means! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6099 Name: A. Moriarity Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. I live in Missouri wh ere airborne lead has been an issue for years due to the lead smelter located sou th of St. Louis. Children in that area who have been tested show high levels of lead in their blood. This is not acceptable. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6114 Name: K. Knepper20 Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year. Seems the very least we can do. I understand our Government is now going to be run by corporations, for corporations, but give the people at least a little air to breathe or you will have fewer customers. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6107
Name: B. Kalison Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Actually, there should be zero lead emissions allow ed! I teach Anatomy & Physiology at the college level and I am well aware of the costs to the health of our children. Lead poisoning can cause mental impai rments as well as anemia and kidney damage. These will lead to long term cos ts in health care. African American children are especially vulnerable due to calcium deficiency in Northern climates. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6113
Name: K. Connell Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. In Colorado, we are c urrently faced with Excel Energy's efforts to bring a new coal burning plant on line in Pueblo. While I don't know its lead emissions profile, it certainly will include mercury poisoning fumes according to my available sources o f information. Please help us. As citizens, we should be protected, not poison ed! Thank you for your consideration! Response: Responded to in preamble.21 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6112
Name: K. Johnson Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Quite frankly even th is amount of lead seems excessive to me and could be obviated by a shift to clean renewable green technologies. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6111 Name: K. Duey Organization: Comment: THIS IS PLAIN COMMON SENSE!!!!! I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility t hat emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring thi s dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6108

Name: K. Van Sant Organization: Comment: This issue is a HUGE priority for us: I st rongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility t hat emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring thi s dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6110
Name: A. Halter22 Organization: Comment: Why do we still have to fight for our righ t to a healthy environment? This has been going on way too long. Stop putting c orporations ahead of people! I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to r equire monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6117

Name: L. Amerman Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. The EPA needs to take control and become an authority in monitoring pollutants. It cannot give way to private interests who pollute more than they should be allowed and harm t he public health and environment. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6170

Name: J. Lent Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Please, in your role as the agency responsible for protecting the environment, take a stand for the environment and public health. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6123

Name: B. Jones23 Organization:
Comment: I exhort the EPA to enact strict rules tha t require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Strictly monitoring the hitherto all but ignored so urces of this highly toxic pollution will improve the health and well being of our citizens and environment -- and especially of our children who a re particularly vulnerable to the dangers of this insidious poison, which has bee n allowed by profitmongering pro-industry "leaders" to contamina te our lives and environment for far too long. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6131
Name: A. Miller Organization: Comment: The EPA should not shy away from its regul atory mission, as corporations have proven time and again that they w ill not police themselves. Therefore, I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules t o require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-0 Name: K. Koopmann Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity, and wildlife, which i s also drastically affected but does not have a means to speak for itself. Thank yo u Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-612924 Name: B. Tieken Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. It is the right thing to do, so please act on behalf of our children. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6128

Name: B. Pratt Organization:
Comment: What does EPA stand for? Show some backbon e for the people and for our environment! I strongly urge the EPA to ena ct rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than hal f a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our childre n who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6127
Name: B. Pritchett Organization: Comment: China is leading the world deeper into dan ger from pollution with its recent industrial expansion explosion. The US set b ad examples for the world for nearly a century, then when we enacted changes to become clean, we repealed the laws and disconnected their teeth. How can we ask China and other developing nations to be clean now when we have suc h a dirty past and a not so clean present? We must lead the world to a cleaner future and we must do it now. It is critical that the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.25 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6126 Name: Comment submitted by B. Jansen Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Please put the people of this country first as well as the planet. Such short sighted policies that allow large levels of toxins into the air to increase profit are unthinkable. Please thin k of the long term health of our planet's biosphere as well. Respectfully, please ti ghten the rules about airborne leads and other toxins and keep them tight. We need the people in power to show some strength and do the right thing. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6101
Name: P. Callen Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Lead monitoring needs to continue, we need to know quantitatively where and how much lead is rele ased into the air. Thank you for revisiting this critical health issue. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6124
Name: M. B. Muetzel Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Please, do it for the children. Response: Responded to in preamble.26 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6100
Name: David J. Shaw Organization: New York State Department of Environm ental Conservation (NYSDEC) Comment: The Department is pleased that EPA is prop osing to reduce the threshold to require ambient monitors around facili ties that emit lead. Certain facilities that emit less than 1.0 tpy could potent ially cause significant lead concentrations in surrounding neighborhoods. The De partment also recognizes that facilities cannot be categorized simply by an annual emission quantity. This is apparent in the EPA’s own analysis which sh ows more than a factor of 10 difference in the amount of lead emitted from a facility that would cause an exceedence at a monitor. Some manufacturing process es result in higher short-term emissions that when averaged over a year would not trigger the monitoring requirement. Other facilities which may emit higher annual amounts of lead do not result in high concentration s in neighboring areas because their emissions are uniformly distributed o ver the course of a year. These facility comparisons are complicated by the t ype of emissions, the potential for upset conditions, whether emissions a re fine or coarse, and the amount of the lead containing particulate matter em itted. The monitor waiver process is an appropriate way to reduce the require ments for monitoring at facilities where it is not needed. This change is n ecessary due to the differing characteristics of the sources covered under this p roposal. An annual emission total is insufficient information to insure that th e public is not exposed to significant lead concentrations. Sources where lead emissions vary monthly or seasonally will have higher ambient impacts over th e 3 month averaging period of the rule than a source with the same total annua l emissions emitted at a constant rate. The EPA should leave the threshold a t 0.5 tpy for this revision of the monitoring regulation. It is unlikely but possi ble that some specific industry or type of facility could have emissions of concern even though they have annual emissions below 0.5 tpy. The data collected under this monitoring regulation will help assess the emission threshold for the next round of regulation review. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6098 Name: M. Schwing Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy).27 Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Let's not go backward s on common sense rules and regulations! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6180
Name: J. F. McComb Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. For the sake of futur e generations this action is an imperative! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6122 Name: L. Feurzeig Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). As a parent, I worked hard to be sure that repainting ou r house did not endanger my child. The country should be doing the same for all our children. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6121
Name: X. Castleton Organization: Comment: I am the mother of an asthmatic three year old with high levels of lead from sources outside the home (we live near a power plant). I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Mon itoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially28 our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6120
Name: A. Tobar-Alatriz Organization: Comment: Have you ever spent time with a child pois oned by lead. Their loving, big eyes are slow to respond. They seem odd ly dulled. Usually of lower income, their mothers do their best to integrate th eir poisoned children into their families and yet it is clear, nonetheless, that it is a huge heartache for the whole family. I believe in a country that takes care of i ts many and diverse communities. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of air borne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6119 Name: W. Gray Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. It is interesting tha t there has been such a ruckus over mercury in our fish and yet lead is just as po isonous! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6133
Name: V. Goldie Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of29 our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. We have known for man y years just how dangerous lead is. Please take action immediately. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6125
Name: B. Levin Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Each piece may not se em so important, but if we don't stop it, piece by piece, it will become so ov erwhelming that it will be beyond our abilities to control the problem. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6218
Name: C. Schuett Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. We are counting on yo u to keep the public safe from toxic emissions. Thanking you in advance for e nacting rules that will truly protect our health and safety. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6228 Name: D. Bryant Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy).30 Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. As someone who suffer s from asthma I believe we should do whatever we can to keep our air clean and prevent this disease. Remember, unless you move to a different planet, we all breathe the same air!!! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6227
Name: S. Holz Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Not acting to impleme nt stronger regulations harms your children too and their kids and so on. W e need to protect the environment and people's health today for a stronge r life-worth-living world for the future. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6225 Name: S. Bjerke Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. THis is NOT only EPA, this impacts our health care issues, education, thinking, crime...look at t he effects of lead.....WE cannot afford to have anyone hired and paid by us, the tax payers, who is not acting in our best interests anymore. NOT BIG BUSINESS--us!!! WE say NO MORE. We can start businesses over, we can let them go ba nkrupt. WE can do this right! There is a better way, and a whole bunch of us waiting to "get it done"!!! Clean up our air, water and food. If it doesn't fit that, don't do it. Do you all shudder when the youth in your families start havin g children? IN our church, too many end up on the prayer list, holes in hearts , half hearts, holes in spines, and that isn't even the neurological add, seizures, sleep disorders.....etc. To stop that, we MUST stop the cause---if it isn't done com pletely clean, then please don't do it. Other folks, honest with transparency, integrity, morals and ethics31 would love your jobs. Seriously. I for one, highly educated, capable, and unemployed. If you cannot do it, please, step aside and let me do your job. thank you for reading and acting responsibly, as we hired you to do. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6224
Name: B. Giza Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. The experience that I and other El Paso Texas residents have had in the past with poisonous lead emissions from the local smelter has taught us that we must be equipped with the information necessary to be informed citizens, with the ability to act as needed to protect the health of our communities. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6223 Name: D. Lopez Hughes Organization:
Comment: The health of our children is foundational to our country's health and future progress. I implore the EPA to enact rules t o require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6222
Name: M. Gorder Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any32 facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. I have family who liv e 7 miles from Dish, Texas. This is of great importance to me. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6221 Name: M. Gulledge Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. You must be willing t o end this environmental hazard. You can and do have the power to do it and I dare say the support of the people. Do the right thing for all of us. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6210
Name: L. Briers Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Lead has no place in our air ,our water, somethings should be free and readily available to all living things and toxin free! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6219
Name: M. Follis Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any33 facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. I dream of the day th e government protects the people instead of helping big business. Will that d ay ever come? Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6231

Name: J. Bezanson Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits half a ton or more of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our communities, especially our children who are so vulnerable to lead toxicity problems. It is unconsionable to allow high exposur e when we know it can lead to lower IQ, behavioral problems, brain damage, kid ney damage and cardiovascular injury. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6217
Name: D. Johnson Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Lead s a serious heal th hazard for every person, and especially to children. Please act accordingly. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6216
Name: C. Enders Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any34 facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. My goodness - at this point in our history and knowledge this should be a "no brainer". Please do the right thing. Thank you. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6215
Name: K. Hall Organization: Comment: Protect my children!! I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6576
Name: P. Ehret Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. I have been shocked t o discover the "out-of-range" amounts of lead and mercury that I have in my body. I suspect all of us have much more of a problem with this than is realized. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6212 Name: C. Livesay Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy).35 Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. THIS IS AN ABSOLUTE M UST!!! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5926 Name: John H. Melby, Jr. Organization: Bureau of Air Management, Wisconsin D epartment of Natural Resources Comment: The Department supports the proposal to ch ange the lead emissions monitoring threshold to 0.5 tons per year (tpy) as appropriate for public health protection, as this is consistent with the CASAC re commendations and EPA’s original proposal. Modeling during the initial asse ssment of emission sources in Wisconsin, suggested that the lead standard could b e exceeded at a facility with emissions between 0.5 tpy and 1.0 tpy. The Regional Administrator is requiring monitoring at this site under the discretion allowe d in the existing rule. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6178

Name: J. Aronstam Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Clean Air---- a basic need, a basic right. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6220
Name: M. Gabriel Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of36 our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. We have a responsibil ity to not hand these problems to the next generation. The buck stops wit h us, and the EPA is the agency of the people and is charged with this respo nsibility on our behalf. I pray you have the balls and conscience to do what's righ t by enacting rules to keep our air clean. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6239

Name: D. Aston Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Airborne lead is a serious health hazard that can c ause irreversible damage, especially in children. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6248 Name: D. Macalady Organization: Comment: Airborne lead pollution should have been o utdated by the end of leaded gas. There is no reason to allow any facilit y to emit airborne lead. Thus, I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require m onitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per yea r (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and wel l being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulner able to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6247 Name: R. Caputo Organization: Comment: Protecting American citizens (and taxpayer s) should be a top37 priority for the EPA. It is time to put PUBLIC SAFE TY before industry profits. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require m onitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per yea r (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and wel l being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulner able to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6246 Name: D. Hastings Organization: Comment: I am a 47 year old father of a 3 1/2 year old and a 1 year old. Their future health in large part, rests in the continued commitment of all of us to a healthy environment. Therefore, I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this and other dangerous pollution is essential to maintaining the continued vitality of our country. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6245
Name: D. Crocker Organization: Comment: WE NEED STRONG laws to protect our entire environment, That's your job!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Mon itoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6244
Name: D. Ramin Organization:38 Comment: Live up to your name and be an agency that truly protects the environment and the people that inhabit it. I stron gly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that em its more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this d angerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6243
Name: P. Jordan Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Lead directly effects the development of children's brains. Monitoring lead pollution is in America's v ital national interest. Do your job! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6242
Name: M. Bush Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Please don't side wit h those who would dirty up our air, without regard for the consequences of their a ctions. Instead, side with the innocent everyday people, whose health will be adve rsely affected if you are not there to regulate even those who pollute at the lower level of .50 ton per year. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-622939 Name: K. Rose Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. The air in America sh ould be as clean as it was when the first European-American set foot on this c ontinent! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6240

Name: L. Bresnan Organization: Comment: We need to get the lead out! I strongly ur ge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6230
Name: M. Kokes Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. WHen it comes to heal th and welfare, our government should be protecting PEOPLE, not Big Bus iness. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6238 Name: D. Bailey40 Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Get the lead out! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6237
Name: S. Rosenblatt Organization: Comment: PLEASE enact rules to require monitoring a t any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). This will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. EMISSION STANDARDS MUST BE ENFORCED and lead poisoning ended !!!!! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6236
Name: C. Cassini Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. I am a Masters prepar ed RN. I find it very upsetting that the EPA. and other government agencies, is del inquent in regard to safety issues. Why on earth is lead STILL an issue? We hav e known about Lead toxicity for many years! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6235 Name: T. Hayward Organization:41 Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Take back your missio n of protecting the environment and accept my apology for allowing the Bush administration to prevent you from doing your job. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6234
Name: P. J. Crabill Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. The quality of the li ves of all Americans now and in the future are dependent upon the cleanliness of our air. Please make it as clean as possible! Thank you!! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6233 Name: A. Morgan Organization: Comment: Nothing is as important as the air we brea the and the water we drink. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require m onitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per yea r (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and wel l being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulner able to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Think of the health of the citizens of this country first and not the corporation's health. In the long run it will even be better for business. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6232
Name: M. Andeson42 Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Please preserve the h ealth and integrity of our planet for all future generations. To knowingly do otherwise while we have non-toxic alternatives available to us would be, at minimum, an act of reckless endangerment for our planet and it's civilization. I hope you will choose to honor a non-toxic present and future for all by wor king to put in the place proper monitoring and regulations of toxic substanc es and the consequences of their use and production. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6209 Name: C. Athey Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. It made a real differ ence when we got it out of paint and will continue to improve matters if we get it o ut of the air, too. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6241 Name: A. Tanguay Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. There must also be st rong airborne mercury controls from burning coal. It is unacceptable that we allow such large levels of mercury to be in the atmosphere as well as lead. Response: Responded to in preamble.43 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6179
Name: J. Jackson Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. I had thought that th e EPA was set up to protect the

e Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6188 Name: J. Hays Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. As a long-time teache r I fear that I am beginning to see some effects of environmental degradation, with lead reaching high levels in an alarming number of women of childbearing age. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6187
Name: L. Holmes Organization: Comment: We need to protect our children from lead poisoning to the very best of our ability. I strongly urge the EPA to enact ru les to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of air borne lead per year (.50 tpy. Children are particularly vulnerable to even tiny a mounts of lead in the environment, and they do not have lobbyists in Cong ress. Response: Responded to in preamble.44 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6186
Name: L. Atkins Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. If we know certain ch emicals are toxic, we have a responsibility to curb corporate greed that puts pr ofits above public health. There's no excuse when there is public support for ecologically sustainable methods of production. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6185 Name: J. Tissavary Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. There cannot be any q uestion as to the priority of this administration’s actions in this: protect us f rom industrial poisons. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6184
Name: J. Falcon Organization: Comment: We've know literally for millennia that le ad is poisonous. What possible excuse can there be for allowing polluting facilities to continue pumping it into the air? I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than hal f a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our childre n who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity.45 Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6183
Name: J. Chambers Organization: Comment: Corporations are granted the PRIVILEGE of doing business in the US. If they are not benefitting the citizens, they should be denied this PRIVILEGE! I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules t o require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of air borne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6182

Name: J. Jarrett Organization: Comment: The frame for even addressing these issues is mired in self-delusion too often. We should be discussing the real cost of pollution, including the long term and environmental costs. Too often the emphasi s is focused on short term economics, benefitting the polluters and the powerf ul. Not all of us are unaware that the decked is stacked. I was in Los Angeles wh en kids dropped on the playground due to the melathione spraying. Agribusi ness sacrificing the children and warning us that the spraying would pit the pan on cars, but not to worry about our lungs. I strongly urge the EPA to e nact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than hal f a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our childre n who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6211 Name: S. Knight Organization:46 Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. The health of our chi ldren and grandchildren is in our hands. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6082

Name: C. D. Organization: Comment: Make health policy, please. I strongly urg e the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6191 Name: L. Findley Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. I have a child with A utism, we don't need to be breathing anything but clean air. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6094
Name: M. Caldwell Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any47 facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. There are no safe lev els of lead or mercury exposure. Please act quickly to restore strict limi ts on emissions! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6177 Name: J. Zugale Organization: Comment: What's next? Putting lead back in gasoline would make it cheaper for industry and consumers too, right? *sigh* I, al ong with lots of other Americans, strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Come on, guys, this o ne's a no-brainer. Any industry that wants the freedom to spew lead into t he air needs to have an eye kept on them, and probably for other polluting thin gs too. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6176 Name: J. Sage Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. I lived 1/5 of a mile from the 2005 tire fire in WI and have experience interacting with the EPA. The f ire caused a large environmental, health and financial impact. I wonde r just how much the unpaid EPA tab is by now, given added interest. It was ove r $640,000 just a few years ago. If I owed that much money, I'd probably be in jail, not free and retired! Response: Responded to in preamble.48 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6175
Name: H. and D. Shaul Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. This should be common knowledge, and we should NEVER have to remind you, of all agencies, of the d amage to young children from exposure to lead poisoning. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6174
Name: J. Reel Organization: Comment: Our Constitution says the government shoul d "promote the general welfare." The first thing a government should do in promoting the general welfare is help ensure a clean, safe place to live. Why else do people band together into groups? For me, a chemically sensitiv e person, clean air is at the basic foundation level of my welfare. I cannot live where I cannot breathe. Indeed, everything on this planet is made weaker an d sicker by breathing toxic air. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to requ ire monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead pe r year (.50 tpy). Thank you for doing your constitutional duty, Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6173

Name: J. Barnett Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. STOP TRYING TO KILL U S!!!!!!!!!!!!!49 Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6172
Name: D. Collins Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Come on folks..this i s a no brainer. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6181 Name: J. Northrop Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any US facility that emits more than half a ton of airb orne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Do the right thing! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6199 Name: M. Hardy Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. it seems like every y ear we hear of toys being recalled because lead is unsafe for everyone, espec ially our developing children. if the government can regulate cheap toys then what's stopping them from regulating factories pumping this toxic metal into our air for us to breathe?50 it's appalling to me that this even needs to be spo ken up about because this is so obviously wrong. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6208
Name: G. & L. Clark Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. We cannot address and control that which we do not monitor. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6207
Name: D. Lewis Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. I want to see TEETH i n this bill. No more sweetheart deals. Actually, I want serious monitori ng of facilities emitting a quarter ton or more of airborne lead contaminants! Wake up you servants of the People! Time to get circumspect! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6206

Name: M. Emmer Organization: Comment: As part of its 8-year assault on the envir onment and our health, and at a time when many children were suffering from as thma and other health51 problems, the Bush EPA in 2008 proposed to weaken r ules on monitoring large-scale sources of airborne lead, such as facto ries and smelting plants. This was just one of many Bush administration gifts to b ig polluters and big business, at our expense. In November 2008, the Ame rican people voted for change. Therefore, I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules requiring monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous lead pollution will impro ve our health and well-being, especially that of our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6205 Name: C. McTigue Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Please help make this change for every living being on the earth to be healthier. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6204
Name: J. Lifshitz Organization: Comment: Before the Corporations (per the Supreme C ourt)rule the country please do this. I strongly urge the EPA to enact ru les to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of air borne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-620352 Name: H. and D. Shaul Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. This should be common knowledge, and we should NEVER have to remind you, of all agencies, of the d amage to young children from exposure to lead poisoning. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6202 Name: M. Burgess Organization: Comment: Enact rules to require monitoring at any f acility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). I k now a child who has been lead poisoned and he is mentally and emotionally damaged for life. It hurts to see him have temper tantrums and not be able to speak h is own name, when he could before. Do NOT let anyone put lead in our air to damage our children. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6189
Name: L. J. M. Khan Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. As a country, it is i n our best interests to ensure that our children have the healthiest environment in whi ch to grow and develop into strong and valuable, contributing members of our so ciety. How can they do that if their health and mental development is affected by air that is polluted with lead toxins? Who benefits from loose regulation of facilities that emit such poisons? Those companies, not the American people. Take this chance to make a brighter future for our children and, ultimately, our country by putting our children first!53 Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6200 Name: M. Epstein Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Even tiny amounts of lead cause lower IQs in children. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6190

Name: L. Keenan Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. I am a nurse who work s with mothers and infants, and I am very concerned about the toxic substances to which we expose our infants even before birth. Please do not let indust ry trump the health of our children. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6198 Name: M. Markesteyn Organization: Comment: The time has past! So the world will be a safer place for life now and the generations to follow we must strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the54 health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6197 Name: M. Vayanas Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. My gosh!!!! Where doe s it end! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6196 Name: L. Asbury Organization: Comment: I STRONGLY urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of air borne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. We must act NOW to st op the destruction of our planet! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6195

Name: S. Bonness Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. It is irresponsible t o allow continued toxic55 substances to pollute the air and water. Detrimenta l effects of the combination of all these substances are playing out in interact ion with the Western lifestyle diet, and manifesting in huge numbers of individual s with chronic disease. We must put a stop to this. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6194
Name: S. Woodall Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. We cannot claim to lo ve children and yet allow the air they breathe to be polluted in the name of corp orate profits. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6193
Name: A. Raich Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). You have a responsibility to the American people to pro tect them from the health hazards posed by these emissions. Stop bowing to th e pressures from big business and start doing your job! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6192
Name: L. Paulson Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy).56 Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Here in Milwaukee we are often warned of ozone levels and of various pollutants which lower our ai r quality and endanger the health of many residents. While some progress has b een made and there is greater awareness that there indeed are problems, a ny relaxation of monitoring, particularly with several large power generating fa cilities and other large industries nearby, could well leave us unaware and therefore unprepared of the presence of lead and other pollutants in our air. P lease enact strong monitoring rules which would protect public health and safety. Aren't public health and safety the EPA's highest priority? I would hope so. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6171

Name: Laurence R. Organization: Comment: The cost of the physical and mental damage done by lead poisoning far outweighs the profit to the industry from compr omised standards. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring a t any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy) . Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6201 Name: M. Mataya Organization: Comment: The more we put into the air, the more ast hma and other respiratory problems we have, as well as neural and physical da mage. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any fac ility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Mon itoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.57 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5979 Name: J. McCallay Organization: Comment: Please protect our environment. That's you r job. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any fac ility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Mon itoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5971 Name: A. Kiepe Organization:
Comment: Facilities that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5990
Name: M. Rosenfeld Organization: Comment: I have just had 20 EDTA chelation treatmen ts to get lead out of my body. And tests have shown that lead IS being elimi nated by these treatments, which I hope will help ameliorate the chemical sens itivity condition I have. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require mon itoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per yea r (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and wel l being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulner able to the risks posed by lead toxicity. I am almost 80 years old. I thought that the elimination of leaded gasoline and the warnings about drinking wine from leaded crystal would eliminate the hazard of lead for those younger than I. But it seems this isn't so, since I now find there is lead in our air from fact ories and smelting plants. We obviously need tougher emissions standards.58 Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5988
Name: L. Godshall Organization: Comment: As citizens, we are helpless to do anythin g about this daily assault on our health. We look to you as the only way to re gulate dangerous lead in our atmosphere. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5987 Name: M. Vaughn Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. At some point we must respect human health over the almighty dollar. Thank you! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5986

Name: M. Garrett Organization: Comment: The time is now. We know the dangers of le ad. Now let's act upon this knowledge. America is watching. I strongly urg e the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are59 particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5983
Name: S. Anderson Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. This is what I like t o call a "no-brainer." It's time to put the human health ahead of corporate interest. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5982

Name: M. McLoone Organization: Comment: Monitoring this dangerous pollution will i mprove the health and well being of our community, especially our childre n who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Not monitoring enables the polluters to continue sacrificing long-term communi ty health and prosperity for many in favor of their short-term profits for a sel ect few. In order for a market system to work properly, safeguards like these must be established. So what's it going to be - excessive profits and pollution or pu blic health and prosperity? Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5992

Name: M. Cuma Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the60 risks posed by lead toxicity. This is particularly pressing for me and my family since we live in Salt Lake City, Ut. which has a la rge copper smelter next to a 1+ million metro area and is downwind from many min ing operations to the west. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5980
Name: L. Cohen Organization: Comment: If our intention as a group of human being s that share one planet is to thrive in a future of healthy existence, then we mu st make the necessary changes to allow that reality. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than hal f a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our childre n who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5993

Name: N. Ross Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). I can't imagine how someone could argue against such a rule . The harmful effects of lead are widely known. Don't let the financial gain of a few carry more value than the health of us all. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5978
Name: R. Clarksen Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy).61 Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. I urge you to put the health and safety of everyone in this country ahead of the interests of companies who are only concerned with their bottom line. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5977
Name: D. Peick Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. We cannot afford to i gnore the effects of cumulative exposure to even small amounts of toxins , as they are present everywhere in our environment. The long term health effects are not fully understood at this time, but preliminary evidence s uggests that the effects of all these toxins are harming our health as a society. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5976
Name: J. Kindel Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. We took as lead out o f our gas, we are healthier now because of it let's not blow it now. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-597562 Name: L. Dhanani Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. It is very important that the EPA be given the legislative means necessary to regulate clean air. Without this happening, who is going to make sure that toxic lead and other pol lutants are not belched into our skys. We need strict standards to be enforced n ow more than ever. Please work for the people and not corporate interests. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5974
Name: L. Jordan Organization: Comment: I am writing to express my strong support for enacting rules requiring sites releasing more than .5tpy of lead t o be monitored. Speaking as a woman who is planning to bring children into the wo rld in the next few years, I am extremely concerned about the adverse and perman ent effects that environmental toxins, including airborne lead, have on children. We badly need new rules that allow us to monitor these poisons an d enforce emissions standards. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5973
Name: J. Knier Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Additionally, our gov ernment needs to LIMIT the amount of airborne lead. It is no longer acceptable to protect the profits of a few at the expense of every American citizen. Response: Responded to in preamble.63 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6011 Name: W. and A. Selfridge Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children and grandchi ldren who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. By now, everyone knows of the dangers of lead poisoning. Please take the lead in preventing it. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5981

Name: L. Krantz Organization: Comment: It is important that our government agenci es are funded and supported in their efforts to monitor the safety of all Americans. This means that the EPA should be directed to monitor all pote ntial risks to human health. Lead is known to be of significant risk to children 's mental development and significant sources of lead need to be monitored. A s a Public Health Nurse I've spent many hours working with families exposed to l ead in their household environment. To allow significant sources of airbor ne lead unmonitored borders on professional and governmental negligence of public obligations to protect. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6001 Name: N. Joyce Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. I live with an air fi lter at home, an air filter at work. I had to pay for both. More needs to be done to pro tect people from harmful emissions.64 Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6084
Name: S. Roth Organization: Comment: After almost a decade of weakened, neglect ed or dismantled environmental policy, now is the time to undo the d amage wrought upon our neighbors, friends, family and fellow humans. Right now is the time to enact stronger policies to mend the damage done to our ai r and planet. It's no question really, it's a simple choice. It's an act of respon sibility and intelligence. Of respect and of acting fully human. Not just for fut ure generations but for today and for ourselves. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6009
Name: S. Glover Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. It is clear that we n eed to do all we can to clean up the emissions that threaten the health of the plane t. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6008 Name: E. Dastrup Organization:65 Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Lead is a harmful neu rotoxin that our society is working hard to get out of our homes, toys, and air . Please don't abdicate your ability to monitor the airborne lead from these fac ilities. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6007 Name: R. Dunning Organization: Comment: Listen up EPA--this is coming from a scien ce major...I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Mon itoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6006
Name: P. Ward Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. How can our children be future leaders with a diminished mental capacity from lead poisoning? Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6005
Name: B. Christlieb Organization:66 Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. While I DO NOT believ e in cap and trade and climate change, I believe that we should "clean up our yard" and stop poisoning the air we breath and stop poisoning the water we d rink...meaning do NOT fluoridate the water. It too, is poison. We are to be good stewards of what God has granted us! Oops...did I say that outloud? YES. ..GOD! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6004
Name: O. Lahav Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Don't bend to politic al pressure! Peoples' lives are at risk! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5991
Name: M. Suda Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. For God's sake, what could be more basic and decent than protecting our precious little ones fro m heavy metals that destroy their IQ's and nervous systems? C'mon EPA, get the lead out and keep it out!! Thank you! Response: Responded to in preamble.67 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6002
Name: M. Okuzumi Organization: Comment: It's well known how harmful lead is to you ng children. To protect public health please enact rules to require monitor ing of sources emitting more than half a ton a year into the air. Your own techn ical analysis supports this. please take this step to protect public health. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5970 Name: K.J. Kaye Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. In light of incontrov ertible molecular evidence of lead neurotoxicity, even in nanograms, downgrading lead monitoring from any producer is irresponsible in the extreme. It is ret rograde. It flies in the face of knowledge. Fetal, neonate, and child health, let al one nonhuman considerations, are not economic blue sky factors. Have a spine and stand up for stringent monitoring by the EPA of all lead product ion sources. You know it makes sense. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6000
Name: N. Griffin Organization: Comment: I am writing to urge you to revisit these rules about monitoring lead pollution. The volume of research showing the harmf ul effects of lead in the environment should be compelling enough reason not to keep weak and ineffective monitoring in place. Monitoring this da ngerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.68 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5999

Name: B. Cox Organization:
Comment: Not to monitor some? Reduce the effectiven ess of monitoring? Reduce the protections for our children?! This shou ld not even be a question. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require mon itoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per yea r (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and wel l being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulner able to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5998

Name: N. Mcnamara Organization:
Comment: PLEASE DON'T LET CORPORATE GREED WRITE OUR LAWS! I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to req uire monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5997

Name: K. Narveson Organization: Comment: Please act in the public interest, and ena ct rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than hal f a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). There's no debate about the toxic e ffects of lead poisoning. Therefore, facilities should not be allowed to viol ate emissions standards and harm public health. But without monitoring, we can' t know about violations, so clearly, we need careful monitoring - and clean fac ilities needn't fear monitoring. Please act in the public interest, and enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than hal f a ton of airborne lead per69 year (.50 tpy). There's no debate about the toxic e ffects of lead poisoning. Therefore, facilities should not be allowed to viol ate emissions standards and harm public health. But without monitoring, we can' t know about violations, so clearly, we need careful monitoring - and clean fac ilities needn't fear monitoring. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5996 Name: N. Honeychuck Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. As a provider of prim ary health care I absolutely and firmly believe emissions should be thoroughly a nd strictly monitored -- whatever gets into our lungs, gets into our bodies! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5995
Name: N. Walker Organization: Comment: Lead in air = bad. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than hal f a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our childre n who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5994 Name: N. Wang Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any70 facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Why must the EPA negl ect the health and wellbeing of the very people you are charged to pro tect? Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6003
Name: O. Pierce Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. I have a personal int erest in how clean the air is - my wife suffers from asthma. Please consider the he alth of the nation. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5935
Name: P. Hosler Organization: Comment: I support EPA's proposed standard of monit oring air for lead at any facilities that emit .5 ton of lead or more. This i s based on technical analysis, though there is no safe level of lead exposure for children. I also think it is important to monitor lead in the ambient air, espec ially downwind from the source. I live in Missouri, and the lead in the Her culaneum area has hurt many people. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5972
Name: K. Held Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any71 facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. My son, who has learn ing challenges due to a stroke in utero, also has high lead levels, so he h as to deal with a double whammy. Please do all you can to keep lead away fro m our children! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5925
Name: Justin Casson Organization: Comment: The EPA is proposing to change the lead em ission threshold at which monitoring agencies are presumptively require d to conduct lead monitoring from 1.0 tpy (tons per year) to .50 tpy. The EPA’s analysis noted that a .50 tpy lead source could possibly cause amb ient lead concentrations to exceed the revised lead NAAQS (National Ambient Air Quality Standards). It can be argued that the current 1.0 tpy emission thr eshold might not provide for an adequate margin of safety as required by the Cle an Air Act. However, reducing the emissions threshold to .50 is an arbit rary decision that is likely to place an unnecessary burden on monitoring agencies to evaluate sources that very likely have no possibility of exceeding the NA AQS standards. Instead, I propose the emission threshold to be reduced to .75 , allowing monitoring agencies more time and resources to inspect lead so urces that are truly detrimental hazards. Requiring an air quality monit or to be placed near a facility emitting lead at the rate of .50 tpy will cause the unnecessary expenditure of funds that could be better apportion ed to facilities emitting truly dangerous amounts of lead. Using the existing lead monitoring data, the EPA previously found that a threshold of 1.0 is more li kely to clearly identify sources that would contribute to exceed the NAAQS. Lowering this threshold to .50 will not only burden the agencies, but also the facilities which have already lowered the emissions greatly, to a level c onsidered nontoxic by the EPA’s original findings. The timeline proposed by t he EPA would require monitoring agencies to evaluate, site, and install up to 161 source-oriented monitoring sites within 1 year of promulgation of t he revised monitoring requirements. Because the revised standards are alr eady ten-times tighter than the previous standards, compliance with the propose d emissions standards will impose an undue burden on the manufacturing facilit ies that already strove to comply with the current level. The EPA’s analysis s hows that four of seven sites that were studied support an emission thresho ld less than the emission threshold of 1.0 tpy set by the final rule on the r evised lead NAAQS. However, if the threshold is revised to .50 tpy, al l but one of those sites are no72 longer in compliance. I propose an emission thresho ld of .75, which is more manageable and will allow facilities that are not p roducing toxic amounts of lead to continue operation. Response: We based the revised threshold on an anal ysis which relied on three different approaches to determine what level of emi ssions could lead to an exceedence of the NAAQS. Our analysis indicates 0.5 0 tpy is the most appropriate level to establish the threshold.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5945
Name: Christina Ritter Organization: Comment: I support EPA's proposed 0.5 tons per year threshold for monitoring. In its final rule on the lead NAAQS, EPA determined that an ambient standard of 0.15 μg/m3 of lead is required to protect public health with an adequate margin of safety. Only through adequate monitoring to identify areas of noncompliance and actions to ensure compliance will the NAAQS serve its intended purpose of protecting sensitive population s sufficiently. EPA's proposed monitoring threshold of 0.5 tons per year will provide the information necessary to assess compliance with the ambient sta ndard and to identify violations of the standard and is supported by the technical analysis. The one ton per year standard is insufficient to assure ade quate protections and is an arbitrary level set more by considerations of conve nience than contamination. Due to the elevated levels measured in the air and soils downwind of major lead emitting facilities, it is crucial that these areas be closely monitored so that unsafe levels of lead can be detected and measures taken to reduce the health threat to neighboring communities. There is no safe level of lead exposure for children, and the NAAQS is one of the few health-ba sed standards that can help protect them from this toxin. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5944
Name: Dick Valentinetti Organization: National Association of Clean Air Age ncies (NACAA) Comment: EPA is proposing to lower the emissions th reshold for source-oriented monitoring of lead from 1 ton per y ear (tpy) to 0.5 tpy. As there is evidence that high levels of lead exposure can o ccur even near sources emitting 0.5 tpy of lead, NACAA supports the propos al to lower the73 source-oriented emissions threshold. Lowering the t hreshold to 0.5 tpy will also help regulatory agencies gather the data necessary for fully implementing the lead NAAQS. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5941
Name: Catharine Fitzsimmons Organization: Iowa Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) Comment: EPA's primary analysis performed in suppor t of its proposed monitoring threshold of 0.5 tpy is based on impact to source strength ratios at seven monitoring locations. For a given monitoring site, unless the monitoring locations happened to be at the point of maximum im pact of the source, the extrapolated "lowest NAAQS violating emissions rate s" for these sites will be biased high. If some of the seven sites chosen for analysis are impacted by dust that has been deposited near the lead source, then the results for those sites will be biased low, the emissions thresholds calculated will not provide a good estimate of the stack emissions that would give ris e to a NAAQS violation. Even in the seven sites chosen for EPA's threshold calculation happen to be at the point of maximum impact of the facility emissio ns and were minimally impacted by emissions from wind- blown deposition, the sites chosen for the analysis would have to be representative of all lea d facilities in order to extrapolate the emissions threshold from these faci lities to all lead emitting facilities. We suggest that a better technique to e stimate the emission threshold that is likely to give rise to a NAAQS violation is to perform dispersion modeling for a representative group of facilities a nd to examine the relationship between the emission rates and the concentration at the point of maximum impact. Response: As discussed in the preamble to this rule , the EPA worked with limited data. As a result of this and final rule, a nd the 2008 final rule, over 200 source oriented monitors will be deployed. Data fro m these new monitors will be used in future rulemaking to determine if a diff erent emission threshold or approach is needed.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5940
Name: Gail Wechsler Organization: Jewish Community Relations Council Comment: JCRC supports EPA’s proposed 0.5 tons per year threshold for74 monitoring. In its final rule on the lead NAAQS, EP A determined that an ambient standard of 0.15 μg/m3 of lead is required to protect public health with an adequate margin of safety. Only through adequate monitoring to identify areas of noncompliance and actions to ensure compli ance will the NAAQS serve its intended purpose of protecting sensitive populations sufficiently. EPA’s proposed monitoring threshold of 0.5 tons per year will provide the information necessary to assess compliance with the ambient standard and to identify violations of the standard and is supporte d by the technical analysis. The one ton per year standard is insufficient to as sure adequate protections. Due to the elevated levels measured in the air and soil s downwind of major lead emitting facilities, it is crucial that these areas be closely monitored so that unsafe levels of lead can be detected and measures taken to reduce the health threat to neighboring communities. There is no safe level of lead exposure for children, and the NAAQS is one of the few health-ba sed standards that can help protect them from this toxin. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5939 Name: Anonymous Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. It is a collective mo ral imperative to ensure that our children can trust the EPA to be a strong regulator for their health and well being. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5947
Name: Therese M. Cirone Organization: RSR Corporation (RSR) Comment: RSR strongly supports EPA’s proposal to am end Section 58.l0(a)(4) and Appendix D to Part 58 to reduce from 1.0 tons p er year (TPY) to 0.5 TPY of lead emissions as the presumptive threshold at w hich monitoring agencies must monitor the ambient air near lead sources that meet or exceed this threshold. While the RSR secondary lead smelters we re NOT among the seven75 whose emissions EPA sampled in connection with the proposal} RSR agrees with EPA’s conclusions that (1) lead sources emitti ng less than 1.0 TPY have the potential to cause ambient lead emissions to ap proach or exceed the recently-strengthened National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for lead}; and (2) monitoring agencies will be unable t o reliably identify these sources based on a 1.0 TPY threshold, which ultimat ely could result in the failure to designate some areas as nonattainment fo r Iead.4 EPA’s proposal also seeks public comment on potential alterative monito ring thresholds between 0.5 TPY and 1.0 TPY. RSR believes that no such alte rnative is necessary or appropriate. The proposed 0.5 TPY threshold most ef fectively would serve EPA’s expressed intention of protecting against obs erved NAAQS exceedences likely attributable to stationary sources of lead e missions, given what EPA described as a "dramatic drop" in emissions that we re associated with leaded gasoline.5 As EPA’s fresh analysis of the data indi cates that the proposed 0.5 TPY monitoring threshold is necessary to attain and maintain the recently revised lead NAAQS, the selection of a monitoring t rigger over 0.5 TPY would impede this objective. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5936

Name: J. Carter Organization: Comment: being a resident of missouri, i support th e proposed changes to the epa lead monitoring guidelines. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5950
Name: Laurel L. Kroack Organization: llinois Environmental Protection Agen cy Comment: The Illinois EPA fully supports the commen ts provided by the National Association of Clean Air Agencies (NACAA) by letter dated February 12, 2010. These NACAA provided comments stated the following; I. Supported Lowering the Source-Oriented Monitoring T hreshold to 0.5 tons per year and Proposed Revising Non-Source- Oriented Req uirements to Mandate Monitoring at NCore sites, Response: Responded to in preamble.76 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5934
Name: B. Rasche Organization: Comment: I support Environmental Protection Agency' s proposed rule revisions concerning ambient air monitoring require ments for the toxic metal lead because it will help ensure that all communiti es that face the risk of unhealthy levels of airborne lead pollution are ade quately protected. The Clean Air Act requires the EPA to set National Ambient Ai r Quality Standards (NAAQS) at levels that protect public health with a n adequate margin of safety (CAA § 109(b)(1)). Sufficient monitoring for compli ance with the NAAQS is essential to achieve the goal of protecting sensiti ve subpopulations, like children and pregnant women, with an adequate margi n of safety. I support EPA's proposed 0.5 tons per year threshold for moni toring. In its final rule on the lead NAAQS, EPA determined that an ambient stan dard of 0.15 μg/m3 of lead is required to protect public health with an a dequate margin of safety. Only through adequate monitoring to identify areas of no ncompliance and actions to ensure compliance will the NAAQS serve its intended purpose of protecting sensitive populations sufficiently. EPA's proposed monitoring threshold of 0.5 tons per year will provide the information necessar y to assess compliance with the ambient standard. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5933
Name: J. Parker Organization: Comment: Please approve the monitoring level of 1/2 ton. If such a threshold becomes unnecessary, it can be adjusted once that h as become apparent. Lead and its toxicity are well established and in this c ase, I think it wise to monitor more than less. As for the industry polluters who a re inevitably going to lobby against this monitoring level, simply remind them t hat monitoring is not the same thing as regulation. Monitoring gives them the chance to mitigate the effects of an environmental problem before it becom es a reason to regulate. Thank you for your service to the citizens of the U nited States. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-593277 Name: C. Boschert Organization: Comment: I support Environmental Protection Agency' s proposed rule revisions concerning ambient air monitoring require ments for the toxic metal lead because it will help ensure that all communiti es that face the risk of unhealthy levels of airborne lead pollution are ade quately protected. The Clean Air Act requires the EPA to set National Ambient Ai r Quality Standards (NAAQS) at levels that protect public health with a n adequate margin of safety (CAA § 109(b)(1)). Sufficient monitoring for compli ance with the NAAQS is essential to achieve the goal of protecting sensiti ve subpopulations, like children and pregnant women, with an adequate margi n of safety. I support EPA's proposed 0.5 tons per year threshold for moni toring. In its final rule on the lead NAAQS, EPA determined that an ambient stan dard of 0.15 μg/m3 of lead is required to protect public health with an a dequate margin of safety. Only through adequate monitoring to identify areas of no ncompliance and actions to ensure compliance will the NAAQS serve its intended purpose of protecting sensitive populations sufficiently. EPA's proposed monitoring threshold of 0.5 tons per year will provide the information necessar y to assess compliance with the ambient standard and to identify violations of the standard and is supported by the technical analysis. The one ton per year sta ndard is insufficient to assure adequate protections and is an arbitrary level set more by considerations of convenience than contamination. Due to the elevated levels measured in the air and soils downwind of major lead emitting facilitie s, it is crucial that these areas be closely monitored so that unsafe levels of lead can be detected and measures taken to reduce the health threat to neigh boring communities. There is no safe level of lead exposure for children, and th e NAAQS is one of the few health-based standards that can help protect them f rom this toxin. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5931
Name: P. Zimmerman Organization:
Comment: I submit these comments as a citizen of th e State of Missouri, the number one lead mining state in the nation. I suppo rt Environmental Protection Agency’s proposed rule revisions concerning ambient air monitoring requirements for the toxic metal lead because it wi ll help ensure that all communities that face the risk of unhealthy levels of airborne lead pollution are adequately protected. I support EPA?s proposed 0.5 tons per year threshold for monitoring. In its final rule on the lead NAAQS, EP A determined that an ambient standard of 0.15 μg/m3 of lead is required to protect public health with an adequate margin of safety. Only through adequate monitoring to identify78 areas of noncompliance and actions to ensure compli ance will the NAAQS serve its intended purpose of protecting sensitive populations sufficiently. The one ton per year standard is insufficient to assure adequate protections and is an arbitrary level set more by considerations of conve nience than contamination. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5930
Name: Judith Zwicker Organization: JZ Consulting Comment: Sufficient monitoring for compliance with the NAAQS is essential to achieve the goal of protecting sensitive subpopu lations, like children and pregnant women, with an adequate margin of safety. I support EPA’s proposed 0.5 tons per year threshold for monitoring. In its final rule on the lead NAAQS, EPA determined that an ambient standard of 0.15 μg/ m3 of lead is required to protect public health with an adequate margin of sa fety. Only through adequate monitoring to identify areas of noncompliance and a ctions to ensure compliance will the NAAQS serve its intended purpos e of protecting sensitive populations sufficiently. EPA’s proposed monitoring threshold of 0.5 tons per year will provide the information necessary to asse ss compliance with the ambient standard and to identify violations of the standard and is supported by the technical analysis. The one ton per year standa rd is insufficient to assure adequate protections and is an arbitrary level set more by considerations of convenience than contamination. Due to the elevated levels measured in the air and soils downwind of major lead emitting facilitie s, it is crucial that these areas be closely monitored so that unsafe levels of lead can be detected and measures taken to reduce the health threat to neigh boring communities. There is no safe level of lead exposure for children, and th e NAAQS is one of the few health-based standards that can help protect them f rom this toxin. I support expansion of the lead monitoring network because th e existing monitoring network for lead is insufficient. Few of the curren t sources emitting more than one ton of lead per year have adequate downwind mon itoring. The expansion of the lead monitoring network contained in the propos ed rule will provide crucial data on the concentration of lead in ambient air so as to protect vulnerable populations. Monitoring downwind of facilities that emit between 0.5 and 1 tons per year of lead is necessary to provide suffi cient information about airborne lead levels near these facilities in order to adequately enforce the NAAQS and to protect health with an adequate margin of safety. The addition of 161 additional source-oriented monitors, for a t otal of 272, will significantly expand public health protections for communities ne ar large industrial sources. Response: Responded to in preamble.79 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5928
Name: J. Morian Organization: Comment: I support EPA's proposed half-ton per year threshold for monitoring. The EPA?s final rule on lead NAAQS indicated that a n ambient standard of 0.15 μg/m3 of lead is required to protect public he alth with an adequate margin of safety. Only a monitoring threshold of 0.5 tons per year will enable the agency to ensure compliance and the technical data supports this. A one ton per year standard is arbitrary and the figure is not ra tionally supported by the technical data underlying the .5 ton standard. Ther e is no safe level of lead exposure for children, and children will not be pro tected without adequately monitoring and enforcing the NAAQS. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5927
Name: Kenneth Cohen Organization: Missouri Coalition for the Environmen t Comment: I am a resident of the state of Missouri. The Clean Air Act requires the EPA to set National Ambient Air Quality Standar ds (NAAQS) at levels that protect public health with an adequate margin of sa fety (CAA § 109(b)(1)). Sufficient monitoring for compliance with the NAAQS is essential to achieve the goal of protecting sensitive subpopulations, li ke children and pregnant women, with an adequate margin of safety. I support EPA's proposed 0.5 tons per year threshold for monitoring. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5938
Name: D. A. McDaniel Organization:
Comment: I submit these comments as a citizen of th e State of Missouri, the number one lead mining state in the nation and home to North America's largest primary lead smelter, several secondary smelters, a nd a 300-year history of lead production. I support Environmental Protection Agen cy's proposed rule revisions concerning ambient air monitoring require ments for the toxic metal lead because it will help ensure that all communiti es that face the risk of80 unhealthy levels of airborne lead pollution are ade quately protected. The Clean Air Act requires the EPA to set National Ambient Ai r Quality Standards (NAAQS) at levels that protect public health with a n adequate margin of safety (CAA § 109(b)(1)). Sufficient monitoring for compli ance with the NAAQS is essential to achieve the goal of protecting sensiti ve subpopulations, like children and pregnant women, with an adequate margi n of safety. I support EPA's proposed 0.5 tons per year threshold for moni toring. In its final rule on the lead NAAQS, EPA determined that an ambient stan dard of 0.15 μg/m3 of lead is required to protect public health with an a dequate margin of safety. Only through adequate monitoring to identify areas of no ncompliance and actions to ensure compliance will the NAAQS serve its intended purpose of protecting sensitive populations sufficiently. EPA's proposed monitoring threshold of 0.5 tons per year will provide the information necessar y to assess compliance with the ambient standard and to identify violations of the standard and is supported by the technical analysis. The one ton per year sta ndard is insufficient to assure adequate protections and is an arbitrary level set more by considerations of convenience than contamination. Due to the elevated levels measured in the air and soils downwind of major lead emitting facilitie s, it is crucial that these areas be closely monitored so that unsafe levels of lead can be detected and measures taken to reduce the health threat to neigh boring communities. There is no safe level of lead exposure for children, and th e NAAQS is one of the few health-based standards that can help protect them f rom this toxin. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5958 Name: Anonymous Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5969

Name: K. Mortensen Organization:81 Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Forget the politics a nd remember: your job is to look out for the common good. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5968 Name: K. Lindley Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5967
Name: K. Pierce Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). I live on the north side of Chicago, several miles from a steel mill and other factories with toxic pollutants, including lead. Recently I l earned I have adrenal fatigue, which in part comes from the chemical exposure in t he city. Chicago has been shown to have very high lead levels in the air. Whe n I visit my parents in northwest Illinois, about 100 miles from Chicago, I feel much better within days. The best thing that can be done for my condit ion is to reduce or eliminate the stress, including the chemicals and toxins in m y life. Those discharging lead at the current standard reap all the benefits and p ay none of the costs, such as the steps I am taking to detoxify and support my li ver to rid myself of their lead. My life depends on taking this important action. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5966
Name: A. Tindell82 Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. I want safe air to br eathe, clean water to drink, and safe fish to eat. Toxic lead must be kept out of ou r environment as much as possible from all sources! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5965
Name: S. Fowler Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. It is important that we consider the future of this planet. Actually the planet will still be here and probably some organisms deep in the earth but it will be very dismal on the surf ace! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5964
Name: James Brook Organization: Maine Department of Environmental Pro tection (ME DEP) Comment: Maine supports lowering the source-oriente d monitoring threshold and revising the non-source oriented requirements t o include an option of monitoring at NCore sites . Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5963 Name: James L. Kavanaugh83 Organization: Missouri Department of Natural Resour ces (MODNR) Comment: Based on our analysis, a reduction from 1. 0 to 0,5 tons per year (tpy) in the lead source emission rate that triggers the monitoring requirement is not expected to significantly affect the lead' monitori ng network in Missouri . This is due to the evaluation of many of these smaller s ources in our previous network review. To further study the use of emissio n thresholds as a metric for monitoring site placement, the Department conducted a sensitivity analysis of a hypothetical coal combustion source with lead emiss ions of two tpy and a stack height of 250 feet using AERIMOD. Over a five-year meteorological period, this source exhibited a maximum monthly lead concen tration of 0.004 microgram/cubic meter (ug/m) . These results are co nservative for coal combustion sources because no sources in Missouri e mit two tons of lead except lead processing facilities (mine/mill, secon dary smelter, primary smelter) . Further, even if a source like this exis ted, the concentration is well below the 0.075 11g/m3 threshold for a waiver of th e source monitoring requirement . In addition, nearly all the coal comb ustion facilities with lead emissions above zero in Missouri have stacks that a re well over the 250 feet used in this sensitivity. Therefore, the Department believes that additional monitoring near any large coal combustion sources i n Missouri is not meaningful and will not provide any added benefit t o the rule, but could consume additional resources. As a result, we sugge st that such large stack sources should be evaluated separately from other l ead sources in the context of development of the rule. This should include a scre ening approach using AERSCREEN or another suitable model that could be u tilized to reduce further the source oriented lead monitoring requirement at coal combustion sources. Response: Monitoring agencies are encouraged to use the existing waiver provisions for sources where dispersion modeling de monstrates the source will not cause Pb concentrations to exceed 50% of the Pb NAAQS.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5946
Name: Arthur N. Marin Organization: Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM) Comment: NESCAUM agrees with the EPA proposal to ch ange the lead emission threshold at which agencies are required t o conduct lead monitoring for National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) p urposes near a source from 1.0 to 0.50 tons per year (tpy) (74 FR 69051). Response: Responded to in preamble.84 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5960 Name: Russ Murray Organization: Ohio Cast Metals Association (OCMA) Comment: 1. Current Standard Already Provided Suffi cient Flexibility To account for lead sources emitting less than 1.0 tpy of lead that may have the potential to cause lead concentrations to exceed th e lead NAAQS, the November 12, 2008, final rule provided the EPA Regi onal Administrators the authority to require additional monitoring beyond t he minimum monitoring requirements where the likelihood of lead air quali ty violations is significant or where the emissions density, topography, or populat ion locations are complex and varied, therefore a change in the rule is neces sary. 2. An Adequate Margin of Safety has been Provided The petitioners argued that the 1.0 tpy emission threshold would not provide for an adequate margin of safety as required by the Clean Air Act. Use of previous submitted NEI inform ation, the algorithms contained within the air dispersion model and the f lexibility described above does provide an adequate margin of safety. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6012
Name: D. Jacobs Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to require monitor ing at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per yea r (.50 tpy). The EPA has set strict standards for many things--including diesel emissions on trucks, lead from gasoline, and various emissions from steel pla nts--that are in the best interests of the everyday person. In some cases, th ese standards have been set even if they put a huge financial burden on the ind ustry. Would monitoring lead emissions be even close to the burden that these ot her industries have endured?? I haven't seen any data that the burden w ould be high. And given the potential for VERY SERIOUS health impacts of lead e missions, I think we need to monitor this industry more strictly than cu rrent regulations require. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5957 Name: Jerry Call85 Organization: American Foundry Society (AFS) Comment: Impact of Proposed Revisions to Lead NAAQS EPA has estimated that pursuant to the proposed revised monitoring th reshold the number of industrial sources that would have to install lead monitors would increase from 111 to 217 sources. AFS is, therefore, concerned th at lowering the monitoring threshold for lead emissions to 0.5 tons per year c ould potentially have a significant adverse impact on many small foundries with little, if any, additional environmental and health protection. It is, therefore, imperative that EPA minimize these impacts by using the best data a vailable that are representative of a foundry’s current practices to reduce lead emissions. This will ensure that monitoring will be imposed only on those facilities that pose the greatest risk and where corrective measures may be needed to achieve the lead NAAQS. Response: These monitoring requirements do not appl y to industrial facilities, but to state and local monitoring agencies. As suc h, small foundries which do not cause Pb concentrations to exceed the Pb NAAQS will not be impacted by this rule.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5956 Name: Mark R. Vickery Organization: Texas Commission on Environmental Qua lity (TCEQ) Comment: There should be two primary objectives of the ambient air monitoring network for lead: Source-Oriented Monito ring Requirements l. To measure maximum ambient air concentrations near pot entially significant point sources of lead emissions to the ambient air so dat a will be available to identify whether lead in ambient air is contributing to toxi cologically significant public exposure to lead through ` settled dust in soil, on exterior surfaces, and on interior surfaces. Use of a mass per year threshold for presumptively requiring ambient air lead monitoring near point sources is r easonable. The Appendix D to Part 50 §4.5(ii) provision allowing waiver of th e monitoring requirement if the responsible agency demonstrates that the lead " source will 110t contribute to_ a maximum ambient air lead concentration in exc ess of 50% of the NAAQS . . ." is also appropriate. The December 23, 2009, EPA press release announcing the proposed rule change to the lead ambient air mo nitoring requirements states, "Lead emitted into the air can be inhaled o r can be ingested after it settles. Ingestion is the main route of human expos ure. Children are the most susceptible because they are more likely to ingest lead, and their bodies are developing rapidly." Because the lead in settled du st presents the main lead absorption hazard for children, who are the most su sceptible population, an appropriate additional screening test for waiving t he ambient air lead monitoring requirement would be a test for lead con tent in settled dust or in86 surface soil in the area of predicted maximum ambie nt air impact to which children have meaningful access. Because the concen tration of lead in surface soil represents an integrated measure of the impact of a point source plus other sources of lead on potential exposure for children, it would be an even more protective screening tool than air quality dispersi on modeling for _ allowing lead monitoring waivers. Such a screening tool for exemption from monitoring would be appropriate for sources that have been in place long enough to allow significant lead concentrations to have accumulated in soil for the soil testing to be representative. The five year period required fo r air quality dispersion modeling would be a reasonable minimum source life to allow the use of this screening method for an ambient air lead monitoring waiver. Response: The purpose of the emission threshold app roach is to identify current sources of Pb that may have the potential to exceed the Pb NAAQS. The presence or absence of Pb in soils surrounding a fa cility, while certainly of interest for health reasons, is not a good predicto r of future impacts as new sources may have relatively little Pb contamination in the soils while older facilities who have recently reduced Pb emissions m ay have relatively higher Pb contamination in soils.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5954 Name: Mary Munn Organization: Fond du Lac Reservation Comment: The Band supports the EPA’s efforts to tig hten the monitoring standards for source-oriented monitoring. One- thou sand pounds per year (0.5 ton/yr) of lead emitted anywhere will result in sig nificant exposure, both to people and the environment, especially within the e ntire area of a given facility and the related ambient air impact isopleths. It is essential that levels of exposure be documented although it may be more effe ctive to require better emissions scrubbing. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5953 Name: Sandra F. Veazey Organization: Florida Department of Environmental P rotection Comment: There is an internal inconsistency in the rule with regard to the size of the source of emissions from a facility which mu st be monitored. The requirements. (40 CFR Part 58.10 (a) (4)). states, "A plan for establishing87 source- oriented lead monitoring sites in accordanc e with the requirements of appendix D of this part for lead sources emitting g reater than [emphasis added] 0.50 tpy but less than l.0 tpy shall be submitted t o the Regional Administrator no later than June 30. 2010. The plan shall provide for the required source-oriented lead monitoring sites for lead sour ces emitting greater than [emphasis added] 0.50 tpy but less than l.0 tpy be operational by December 30. 20l0." While the requirements. (40 CFR Part 58 Appe ndix D 4.5 (a)). later state, "...At a minimum there must be one source oriented SLAMS site located to measure the maximum lead concentration in ambient a ir resulting from each lead source which emits 0.50 or more [emphasis adde d] tons per year .... " The Division would support accepting the description of "greater than 0.50 tons per year" since this threshold would create greater sta bility in the monitoring requirements. Response: The EPA regrets the confusion created by its loose use of terms. The correct meaning is "which emits 0.50 tpy or more."

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5953 Name: Sandra F. Veazey Organization: Florida Department of Environmental P rotection Comment: The Florida Department of Environmental Pr otection`s Division of Air Resource Management (division) does not support the proposed lead ambient monitoring requirement change. The reductio n of the monitoring threshold for lead source emissions from l .0 tons per year (tpy) to 0.5 tpy would not add any additional stationary lead source s in the 2005 National Emission Inventory for Florida. It would add 13 air ports as sources Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5951
Name: Avinash Kar Organization: Natural Resources Defense Council (NR DC) et al. Comment: I. In Establishing Monitoring Requirements Under the NAAQS, EPA Must Protect the Health of Sensitive Subpopulat ions With an Adequate Margin of Safety to Protect Against Uncertainties a nd Must Base its Decisions on the Latest Scientific Knowledge. The Clean Air A ct (“CAA”) requires the EPA to set NAAQS at levels that protect public heal th with an adequate margin of safety. CAA § 109(b)(1). In its final rule on th e NAAQS, EPA determined that an ambient standard of 0.15 μg/m3 of lead is r equisite to protect public88 health with an adequate margin of safety. National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Lead, 73 Fed. Reg. 66964, 67006 (Nov. 12, 2008). EPA has characterized the monitoring requirements as design ed to provide the information necessary to assess compliance with tha t ambient standard and to identify violations. See 73 Fed. Reg. at 67024. Ina dequate source-specific monitoring undermines the purpose of the NAAQS by m aking it more difficult, if not impossible, to assure that lead levels in th e ambient air around major lead sources do not exceed the 0.15 μg/m3 standard requi red to protect public health. Without adequate monitoring to identify areas of no ncompliance and subsequent steps to ensure compliance, the NAAQS ca nnot serve its intended purpose of protecting health with an adequate margi n of safety. As discussed further below, EPA’s analysis shows that a monitori ng threshold of 0.5 tons per year will likely capture all potential violations o f the health-based NAAQS standard. It thus provides an adequate margin of sa fety to protect against uncertainties based on a scientific analysis, and w e are pleased to support EPA’s proposed threshold for monitoring. To Protect Public Health with an Adequate Margin of Safety, EPA Should Adopt the Pro posed Rule Provision that Would Require the Installation of Source Monit ors Near Each Lead Source Which Emits 0.50 or More Tons Per Year of Lead. The latest and best available scientific evidence supports the adoption of a near -source monitoring threshold of 0.50 tons per year of lead to protect public hea lth with an adequate margin of safety. The available evidence demonstrates that fa cilities emitting 0.5 tons per year of lead or more have the potential to contribu te to a violation of the NAAQS. According to the US EPA 2005 National Emissi ons Inventory (NEI), almost 600 tons of lead were released into the atmo sphere from industrial facilities. The lead from these facilities can resu lt in unsafe levels of lead in the air and, once deposited in the soils, represents a reservoir for future contamination of airborne dust. Multiple studies ha ve documented elevated levels of lead in the soils surrounding industrial facilities.1 2 3 Similarly, the existing network of monitors of airborne lead level s in the EPA Air Quality System have documented elevated levels of lead down wind from industrial sources. 74 Fed. Reg. at 69052-53. The average of t he maximum 3-month average lead concentration measured between 2001 an d 2003 downwind from the seven facilities where EPA currently has adequa te monitoring was 0.78 μg/m3. This is approximately 3 times greater than t he nationwide average measured during those same years and more than 6 ti mes the current NAAQS.4 Due to the elevated levels measured in the air and soils downwind of major lead emitting facilities, it is crucial that these areas be closely monitored so that unsafe levels of lead can be detected and measures taken to reduce the health threat to neighboring communities. However, the exi sting monitoring network for lead is insufficient to adequately protect publ ic health by monitoring for these potential violations of the NAAQS. While the 2005 NEI identifies approximately 100 sources emitting more than 1 ton of lead per year, only 7 of them currently have adequate downwind monitoring da ta. The expansion of the lead monitoring network contained in the proposed r ule will provide crucial data on the concentration of lead in ambient air so as to protect vulnerable89 populations. EPA’s evaluation of ambient lead level s measured downwind from major sources demonstrates that facilities wit h less than 1 ton per year of lead emissions have the potential to cause ambient lead levels in exceedence of the NAAQS. Therefore, monitoring downwind of facili ties that emit between 0.5 and 1 tons per year of lead is necessary to pro vide sufficient information about airborne lead levels near these facilities in order to adequately enforce the NAAQS and to protect health with an adequate margin of safety. The addition of up to 161 additional source-oriented monitors, f or a total of 272, will significantly expand public health protections for communities near large industrial sources. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5951 Name: G. Vinson Hellwig Organization: The Michigan Department of Natural Re sources and Environment (MDNRE) Comment: 2. The implementation of lead monitoring n ear sources between 0.5 and 1.0 T/v should be delayed until the EPA can rev iew data from the monitoring currently being conducted near sources e mitting greater than 1 T/y. In evaluating the need for ambient air monitoring n ear lead sources emitting between 0.5 and 1 T/y, the EPA reviewed data from e xisting air monitoring stations located near sources. While it is understa ndable why the EPA would do so, relying on such data could overestimate the imp act that lead sources have on a nationwide basis as these existing monitors were likely sited because of source-specific problems. Rather than relying on th is historical data, the MDNRE suggests that the EPA utilize the data collec ted by state and local agencies since January 1, 2010 for those sources em itting more than 1 T/y. The MDNRE suggests that this data would be more represe ntative of sources on a nationwide basis. As such, we request that the EPA delay implementation of the monitoring of sources between 0.5 and 1.0 T/y until these results can be evaluated. Doing so would ensure the proper priorit ization of the EPA and state resources. lf the EPA is lowering the monthly thres hold to 0.5 T/y solely to address petitions by the National Resource Defense Council and others (74 FR 69051), the MDNRE would like to point out that the EPA’s earlier requirements that modeled sources must meet fifty p ercent of the lead NAAQS before a waiver could be granted goes a long way to meeting this objective. The MDNRE recognizes that the EPA is once again proposi ng to grant a waiver from monitoring based upon modeling. However, model ing analyses are not without costs. Response: As described in the preamble to the final rule, the EPA believes that there is adequate information supporting the need t o change the emission90 threshold to 0.50 tpy to finalize that requirement now. Delaying this change could lead to delays in identifying non-attainment areas and the implementation of controls necessary to reduce Pb concentrations t o healthy levels.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5962
Name: Jordan Heiman Organization: Comment: I support EPA’s proposed 0.5 tons per year threshold for monitoring. In its final rule on the lead NAAQS, EP A determined that an ambient standard of 0.15 μg/m 3 of lead is required to protect public health with an adequate margin of safety. Only through adequate monitoring to identify areas of noncompliance and actions to ensure compli ance will the NAAQS serve its intended purpose of protecting sensitive populations sufficiently. EPA’s proposed monitoring threshold of 0.5 tons per year will provide the information necessary to assess compliance with the ambient standard and to identify violations of the standard and is supporte d by the technical analysis. The one ton per year standard is insufficient to as sure adequate protections and is an arbitrary level set more by considerations of convenience than contamination. Due to the elevated levels measured in the air and soils downwind of major lead emitting facilities, it is c rucial that these areas be closely monitored so that unsafe levels of lead can be detected and measures taken to reduce the health threat to neighboring co mmunities. There is no safe level of lead exposure for children, and the NAAQS is one of the few health

‐ based standards that can help protect them from thi s toxin. Because healthy air is important for all human and environm ental health, I further urge EPA to attach specific conditions to the issuance o f waivers of the

source ‐ oriented monitoring requirements for lead and to pr ovide more guidance to states concerning the kinds of sources that are expected to contribute to exceedances of the lead air standard. The condition s for obtaining waivers should be sufficiently strict to limit their use an d states should be advised how to conduct an adequate monitoring program so that t heir states demonstrably meet the standards for healthy air. For example, si te

‐ specific data rather than generic, unreliable emissions estimates should be u sed to evaluate the impact of a source’s emissions on ambient air lead concentrat ions. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-606591 Name: Dennis Lane Organization: Doe Run Resources Corporation Comment: EPA explained its selection process as see king >1 tpy sites with a source-oriented monitor within a 1-mile radius and having 2002 lead concentration data. Id. This process produced seven sites with those characteristics from which individual site specific emission thresholds were calculated. Id. at 69052-53, Table 1. Given that th e purpose of the exercise is to determine if sites with <1 tpy would cause ambient air to exceed the NAAQS level, the obvious question is why EPA extrapolated from >1 tpy sites rather than studying what actually occurred at <1 tpy site s. In support of its proposal to lower the monitoring emissions threshold, EPA st ates that "[b]ased on this sample" of >1 tpy sites, "it appears that lead sour ces that emit less than 1 tpy have the potential to cause ambient air concentrati ons to exceed or approach the lead NAAQS." Proposed Rule, 74 Fed. Reg. at 69054. The conditional tone of this sentence reflects the lack of factual analysis of emissions at <1 tpy sites, and the substitution, instead, of a mathematical co nstruct that uses straight-line extrapolation from >1 tpy sites to estimate what wo uld happen at a <1 tpy emission rate with all other things held constant. While the mathematical construct produces results, the real (and unanswere d) question is how those results compare to what actually happened at <1 tpy sites. That question can be answered only by comparing concrete data about emis sions levels at <1 tpy sites to the extrapolation from >1 tpy sites. No ex planation was given of why actual data from <1 tpy sites were not used. The pr oblems with relying on extrapolation is highlighted by use of the "ratio" (later called the estimated design values in Table 3), which is the result of d ividing the 3-month average lead concentration by the tpy emission rate for eac h sample facility (74 Fed. Reg. at 69052-53, Table 1), to determine a site-spe cific threshold. Initially, a question arises as to whether there is any statisti cal basis for the premise inherent in the ratio calculation, viz., that a cor relation exists between the two numbers being divided, and, if so, whether a simila r correlation would be found at <1 tpy sites. Looking at Table 1 does not yield an apparent correlation, suggesting that other factors besides tpy emissions play a stronger role in determining whether a particular source can meet th e NAAQS. See, e.g., Notice of Proposed Rule, 73 Fed. Reg. 29184, 29263 (May 20 , 2008)("We recognize that a number of factors influence the actual impac t a source of Pb has on ambient Pb concentrations (e.g., local meteorology, emission release characteristics, and terrain)."). While such factor s were to be considered in the waiver process, id., the lack of correlation sugges ts that they should have also been considered in determining how to calculate a r ealistic "ratio." Other than picking a variety of sites with presumably differin g individual circumstances, no consideration was given to what effects other fa ctors might have on the "ratio" results from which the site- specific thres holds were derived. The efficacy of using this >1 tpy sample to extrapolate (based on tpy ratios) what purportedly would happen at <1 tpy sites is also ca lled into question by the wide variance between the estimated minimum and maximum site specific emission92 thresholds. 74 Fed. Reg. at 69053 at Table 4. The m inimum and maximum differ by roughly a factor of 10 in both 2002 (0.42 v. 4.90) and in 2005 (0.32 v. 2.93). Id. The wide variance also supports the view that other factors besides tpy should have been incorporated into the calculus . Interestingly, the "ratio" between the yearly emission rate (tpy) and the site -specific emission threshold in Table 1 appears to show the opposite of what EPA concluded. For example, Doe Run's smelter with by far the highest tpy also has the highest threshold, and site id 420110717 with the second highest tpy also has the second highest threshold. These two sites thus have the lowest "ra tios" listed in Table 1, meaning the lowest Pb ambient air levels per tpy. 7 4 Fed. Reg. at 69052. No evidence has been presented as to what types of "ra tios" <1 tpy sites would have. Rather than extrapolating from a limited rang e of >1 tpy sites, data should have been gleaned Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6055

Name: S. Snow Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Lead poisoning can af fect almost every organ system. Organ systems primarily affected include th e central and peripheral nervous systems, cardiovascular, renal, gastrointes tinal, endocrine, and hematologic systems. Lead can also adversely impact reproductive functioning and the developing fetus and child. Lead compounds are listed as a 2A, probably carcinogenic to humans and 2B, possibly ca rcinogenic to humans. With lead, the precautionary statement should be us ed to protect the living as well as the next generation --the as yet, unborn. S ource: Hazardous Substances Data Bank at National Library of Medicine. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6072

Name: V. Kramer Organization: Comment: The mandate of the EPA is to protect the e nvironment and the93 public, not special interests. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than hal f a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our childre n who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6071 Name: B. A. Daily Organization: Comment: The message below expresses my concerns ab out the urgent need to control the release of toxic pollution. Thank you f or your attention to this serious matter. I strongly urge the EPA to enact ru les to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of air borne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6070 Name: B. Berger Organization: Comment: The right to clean air to breathe is as ce ntral as any right mentioned in the Constitution. I strongly urge the EPA to ena ct rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6069

Name: M. Perron Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of94 our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. I worked in lead pois oning prevention and am aware of the importance of this issue for children' s health. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6068

Name: M. Parse Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Today's children are tomorrow's citizens, and they will need large brain power and healthy bodies to k eep our country functioning. Please don't jeopardize the world's future. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6067

Name: J. Moss Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Those polluters will be the only people that can afford the healthcare needed to combat lead poisoni ng... Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6074

Name: W. Henn Organization: Comment: The EPA cannot drop the ball on lead emiss ions monitoring. It's too important an issue. I strongly urge the EPA to enac t rules to require monitoring95 at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6065
Name: Dennis Lane Organization: Doe Run Resources Corporation Comment: Indeed, the difficulty in drawing any viab le conclusions about what would occur at <1 tpy sites from this sample is und erscored by comparing the medians and the means of the ranges of numbers list ed in Table 4. The means are not listed on the Table, but they can be calcul ated from the range of numbers. The median for the 2002 range is 0.64, whi le its mean is 1.60; for the 2005 range, the median is 0.62, while its mean is 1 .08. Proposed Rule, 74 Fed. Reg. at 69053, Table 4. These differences show not only that the ranges of numbers are skewed to the low side, but also that t he choice of using the median, not the mean, was determinative of the conc lusion that the threshold should be lowered. As the means (1.60 and 1.08) are above 1, they support an over 1 tpy threshold, and thus validate the Final R ule's conclusion that "an emission threshold of 1.0 tpy 'is more likely to cl early identify sources that would contribute to exceedances of the NAAQS' as co mpared to a lower emission threshold." Proposed Rule, 74 Fed. Reg. at 69054. In the initial emissions threshold analysis in this docket, EPA em ployed an arithmetic mean to determine the appropriate threshold. See Notice of Proposed Rule, 73 Fed. Reg. at 29263 ("The arithmetic mean of the four met hods suggests a maximum emission impact of 0.5 μg/m3 per 1,000 kg Pb emitte d per year."). Although comments were requested on the use of the "arithmet ic mean" in the analysis, id., no party challenged its use. The Final Rule st ated that the calculation was "intended to represent a reasonable worst case scen ario." 73 Fed. Reg. at 67026. Likewise, the petitioners seeking reconsideration o f the threshold did not challenge use of the arithmetic mean; arguing, inst ead, that "EPA failed to provide proper public comment on the 1.0 tpy thresh old, [that its selection] "was arbitrary and capricious and that the EPA did not follow its own analysis." Proposed Rule, 74 Fed. Reg. at 69052.1 Nor is an ex planation given in the Proposed Rule as to why use of arithmetic mean was abandoned in favor of the median. Given the critical importance of the choice between the mean and the median to what the ranges represent, EPA should exp lain why it reversed course by using the median instead of the mean with out even calculating the mean, or analyzing why the mean, which had been con sidered the appropriate range point up to now, should be replaced with the median as the reasonable96 measure of the ranges. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6075
Name: K. Weinmann Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. These same children a lready suffer from childhood obesity and diabetes, it is imperative that we do a ll we can to protect them from further assaults on their development. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6063
Name: V. Olds Organization: Comment: Please do the right thing. The EPA should enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than hal f a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). This is a dangerous pollutant and s erious threat to human health. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6062
Name: T. McMillan Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. My hope is that under the leadership of Secretary Salazar this agency will once again uphold the stan dard set by its name - the Environmental Protection Agency.97 Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6060

Name: B. Iverson Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Lead can lead to diff iculty in learning in our young citizens. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6059
Name: T. Hill Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. It's time the EPA ret urned to being the strong resolute guardian defending the environment and the citizens of the United States. The EPA needs the "teeth" it once had and m ore. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6058
Name: L. Wiener Organization: Comment: I do not need to tell you about the many s tudies showing the harm lead does to all of us, but especially to children. We have the information. Now, it is your job to act on that information and requi re monitoring of all facilities which put more than one half ton per year of lead i nto our air. How else can you protect us?98 Response: No response needed.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6057
Name: K. Taebel Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. PLEASE LET ME ASSURE MY GTRANDKIDS THEIR FUTURE IS SAFE-KAY TAEBEL, AUSTIN Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6010
Name: B. McFarland Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Why do we have to con stantly monitor this situation ~ that's your job! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6066 Name: N. S. Rapp Organization: Comment: I support EPA's proposed 0.5 tons per year threshold for monitoring. In its final rule on the lead NAAQS, EPA determined that an ambient standard of 0.15 pg/m3 of lead is required to protect public health with an adequate margin of safety . Only through adequate monitoring to identify areas of noncompliance and actions to ensure compliance will the NAAQS serve its99 intended purpose of protecting sensitive population s sufficiently. EPA's proposed monitoring threshold of 0.5 tons per year will provide the information necessary to assess compliance with the ambient sta ndard and to identify violations of the standard and is supported by the technical analysis. The one ton per year standard is insufficient to assure ade quate protections and is an arbitrary level set more by considerations of conve nience than contamination. Due to the elevated levels measured in the air and soils downwind of major lead emitting facilities, it is crucial that these areas be closely monitored so that unsafe levels of lead can be detected and measures taken to reduce the health threat to neighboring communities. There is no safe level of lead exposure for children, and the NAAQS is one of the few health-ba sed standards that can help protect them from this toxin. Because healthy air i s important for all human and environmental health, I further urge EPA to attach specific conditions to the issuance of waivers of the source-oriented monitori ng requirements for lead and to provide more guidance to states concerning t he kinds of sources that are expected to contribute to exceedances of the lead a ir standard. The conditions for obtaining waivers should be sufficiently strict to limit their use and states should be advised how to conduct an adequate monito ring program so that their states demonstrably meet the standards for healthy air. For example, site-specific data rather than generic, unreliable emissions estimates should be used to evaluate the impact of a source's emissions on ambient air lead concentrations . I support expansion of the lead mo nitoring network because the existing monitoring network for lead is insuffi cient. Few of the current sources emitting more than one ton of lead per year have adequate downwind monitoring. The expansion of the lead monitoring ne twork contained in the proposed rule will provide crucial data on the conc entration of lead in ambient air so as to protect vulnerable populations. Monito ring downwind of facilities that emit between 0 .5 and 1 tons per year of lead is necessary to provide sufficient information about airborne lead levels n ear these facilities in order to adequately enforce the NAAQS and to protect health with an adequate margin of safety . The addition of 161 additional source-o riented monitors, for a total of 272, will significantly expand public health protec tions for communities near large industrial sources. Otherwise, those downwind communities will not receive NAAQS protections. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6083 Name: F. Epsen Organization:
Comment: that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of100 our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. You are EPA, after al l.....your job is to PROTECT the citizens of this country. Thank you for doing y our job, Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6092

Name: S. Somers Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. As a mother, my trust in our government hinges on protecting health and well being above all Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6091 Name: S. Hayworth Organization: Comment: I urge the EPA to require monitoring of le ad emissions by any large-scale polluter (any that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year). The serious health risks posed by lead are w ell-documented. Don't sell out our health to corporate lobbyists! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6090
Name: S. Burstein Organization: Comment: Monitoring of airborne lead at finer level s is of paramount importance due to its toxicity. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than hal f a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our childre n who are particularly101 vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6089 Name: S. Linquist Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. We must be more proac tive in cleaning up our air. Let's get this together and do it! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6088 Name: S. S. Joseph Organization:
Comment: As one who has suffered from the effects o f second-hand smoke all of my life, I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. It may be too late to do anything for those of us who grew up in factory towns and who were exposed t o all of toxic fumes we generated, through our ignorance. But, it is not to o late to clean up our environment for future generations. For the sake of our children, grand children and all who will follow us, it is our duty to do wh atever we can to leave this place better than we found it. Please do what you c an to see to it that we do. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6087
Name: S. Matchett Organization:102 Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Allowing lead in our environments would be a false economy over the long run - and the long run is the only thing to consider wi th something as deadly as lead. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6086

Name: R. Aronson Organization: Comment: Please enact rules requiring monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and wel l being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulner able to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Thank you for considering my opinion

. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6073
Name: W. Romatowski Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. I live near Detroit a nd notice that nearby factories schedule releasing the worst of their emissions whe n they think no one is smelling: at night, Sunday mornings, during incleme nt weather. They are fooling no one, and we must take action to stop the poisoning of citizens, the children, the elderly. These violators must be held accountable, including the jailing of violating owners, payment of damages to victims, and the reimbursement of health care costs borne by the inn ocent victims of these heinous actions, which in truth amount to crimes of the worst sort. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6249103 Name: D. Arnosti Organization: Comment: Any amount of lead is toxic and unacceptab le. EPA should regulate lead found in air emissions, and those distributed across our environment through hunting and fishing activities, as well! I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that em its more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this d angerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6054
Name: M. J. Cedar Organization: Comment: The future is watching. I strongly urge th e EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6214
Name: J. Anderson Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Monitoring such emiss ions may have some financial costs, but not monitoring these emissions will have untold repercussions for generations of Americans. Response: Responded to in preamble.104 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6081 Name: J. Bourgeois Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. We've suffered too mu ch for too long with these kinds of pollutants. We're much too well-informed t o continue to poison ourselves in this way. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6080
Name: R. Harbin Organization: Comment: I am so pleased to see the EPA revisiting the decision to lower the standard for monitoring of lead emitting facilities . It would be wonderful if EPA once again did what it was created to do. The l etter below says it well; I just want to add a personal note imploring you to r estore the .5 ton standard for monitoring lead emissions for all of us, but especi ally for the children of our land. Thank you. I strongly urge the EPA to enact r ules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of air borne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6079

Name: R. Stow Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. I personally feel ver y strongly about lead emissions105 as a future parent; I want my children to be safe f rom this and all contaminants. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6078

Name: M. Stoesz Organization:
Comment: I am an adult asthmatic over 64 with asthm a starting about 10 years ago. Air quality is important to my health and the health of others. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring a t any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy) . Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6077 Name: M. Sarbaugh-Thompson Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. I study the issue of childhood lead poisoning. Lead exposure in children reduces IQ and increases aggre ssive behavior, which can increase crime rates. We simply cannot afford to wa ste our human resources this way. I would like to see a tax on cans of pain t to raise money to compensate for the cost of lead poisoning from old paint. And I strongly support strict rules on lead emissions in the air. I estimate that child hood lead poisoning costs somewhere between $21,500 to $122,000 per child poi soned based on lost income due to reduced IQ, special education costs, medical costs, and costs of increased crime. This is a huge program and those w ho are poisoning children should be stopped and made to pay the costs. Response: Responded to in preamble.106 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6076

Name: W. Raw Organization: Comment: As a mom, and as a friend to children affe cted by lead poisoning, I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require mon itoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per yea r (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and wel l being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulner able to the risks posed by lead toxicity. It is hopeful to think of what a hug e impact this could have. Thank you so much! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6085
Name: J. Piani Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. I thought we were sup pose to see change with this administration. So far all I have seen is more of B ushie Boy's Corporate Corruption Program. When is there going to be chang e? Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6021
Name: P. Bates-Ballard Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. I have personal exper ience with this issue and it means a lot to me. Response: Responded to in preamble.107 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6056 Name: M. Albergato Organization: Comment: Americans are disgusted with the governmen t's inconsistency and vicissitude in regulations and "protection". The we ll being of our health and the health of the planet should be paramount...certainl y more important than corporate lobbies and profits!! I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than hal f a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our childre n who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6031 Name: C. Neely Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6030 Name: G. McNenny Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. The role of the gover nment is to act on the behalf of its citizens. Please take the lead in making sur e that airborne toxic lead is no longer allowed to be unmonitored and uncontrolled. Response: Responded to in preamble.108 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6029
Name: M. Church Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Additionally it will help in the fight against climate change. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6028 Name: M. Haynes Organization: Comment: Far too many children suffer from asthma, and other breathing problems that are, without question, caused by air pollution. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any fac ility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Mon itoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6027
Name: R. & M. Swain Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. THIS WOULD MAKE EVERY ONE [INCLUDING YOU] FEEL BETTER. Response: Responded to in preamble.109 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6026
Name: M. Howard Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). The dangers of lead are proven and I am sincerely conce rned for the health of today's young children. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6033

Name: B. Wanner Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.5I) Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6022 Name: J. R. Conway Organization: Comment: Please enact rules to require monitoring a t any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and wel l being of our community, especially for our children who are particularly vu lnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6034
Name: M. Iltis Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any110 facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Lead poisoning can ca use permanent learning impairment, and adverse effects to the nervous syst em, reproductive system and brain. The cost of monitoring to industry and gover nment is far outweighed by the cost to our children's health. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6020
Name: P. Holmlund Organization: Comment: I have recently become a great grandmother so I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any fac ility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year. It may not ma ke much of a difference to me, but it will to the generation growing up, just born , and our future generations. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6019 Name: P. Baley Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. No amount of profit f or some is worth poisoning the environment for all. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6018
Name: M. Mills Organization: Comment: Airborne lead is a very dangerous pollutan t, and proper monitoring111 of it should be a top priority. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than hal f a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our childre n who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6017
Name: S. Anderson Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. There are limits on l ead in toys, but not in the air that's breathed by EVERYONE? That doesn't make any sense. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6015
Name: S. Gentile Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. As I elementary schoo l teacher, I see first hand the effects that exposure to lead has on children and t heir learning. We need you to take action to keep our children safe and learning. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6014
Name: S. Waldon Organization:112 Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution is an inescapab le part of improving the health and well being of our community, especially our children, who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. As for cost, we pay attention to the risk of lead in children now, or w e & the children, pay for it in so many ways, later. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6013
Name: D. Williams Organization: Comment: Please enact rules to require monitoring a t any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6024
Name: C. Eliot Organization: Comment: There are many (potential) toxins that we are unsure about. Lead is not one of them. We KNOW lead is significant cause of many health issues. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require mon itoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per yea r (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and wel l being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulner able to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6043
Name: L. Gibson Organization: Comment: I've lived near Houston, Texas for the las t 20 years. It is shameful that some many industries in the area allowed to po llute our air without113 regulation and oversite. Since the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality cannot be trusted to protect the people, th e EPA must enact stronger regulations. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6053
Name: F. Hellmich Organization: Comment: As an asthma and allergy sufferer I strong ly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that em its more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). I did not get ast hma until my late 20's and had no prior family history. My youngest daughter is no w being watched for signs of asthma. Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our childre n who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6052 Name: N. Raymond Organization: Comment: I feel very strongly that your agency has not and is not now protecting the lives of the citizens of this countr y and the Universe. It seems like the corporations who are causing this travesty are the ones being protected. THIS MUST STOP!!! I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than hal f a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our childre n who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6051114 Name: E. M. Downie Organization: Comment: It's hard to believe that any government a gency would allow such levels of a known toxin to be emitted, endangering citizens, especially the most vulnerable. This must change. I strongly urge the E PA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than hal f a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our childre n who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6050
Name: R. Van Arsdale Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollutant will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Preventing the monito ring of the sources of pollution, especially something as toxic as lead, i s the worst type of corporate greed over the health needs of our citizenry. I wou ld compare it to the abolishment of thermometers so we could not take a child's temperature to determine whether they are sick or not. Indeed, wit hout monitoring lead emissions, when our children become mentally defici ent we won't even know why? If we allow corporations the freedom to hide w hat they are doing, there is no limit to the abuses that will follow. Don't we k now that modern American corporations are largely acting like sociopaths; th ey have no conscience and face very little responsibility for the most outrag eous assaults on the common good. It is insane to not allow monitoring!!! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6049
Name: E. Smith Organization: Comment: As a scientist and a mom, I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne115 lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6048
Name: F. B. Mullett Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. If there's any sense of accountability for cleaning up the messes each of us makes, business should not be exempt from their share. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6047

Name: M. Bennett Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). This is the minimum that can be done in terms of corporate responsibility and ownership of the social cost of operation. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6032

Name: M. Warner Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring of lead at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the116 risks posed by lead toxicity. Half a ton is a huge amount. Imagine that your family lives downwind, and remember - clean air is everyone's right and responsibility. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6044
Name: R. Johnson Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. It is vital that publ ic safety be protected above the economic interests that oppose enforcement. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6093
Name: B. Waranowitz Organization: Comment: I agree with the provided statement below! - Ben Waranowitz ******** I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6042
Name: P. Rothe Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of117 our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. WAKE UP to the fact t hat we are all on this one little planet together. Let's live on it sustainabl y, in harmony with all life. We need to work together or perish. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6041
Name: S. Teich Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. IT IS ENVIRONMENT FIR ST - NOT INDUSTRY FIRST!!!!! NOT CORPORATIONS FIRST! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6040 Name: P. Livingston Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Really, you should mo nitor for the small particulate, whatever its constituents but lead in particular is a concern. Mercury too if you are near a power plant. Thanks f or working on these issues of importance to public health. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6039
Name: P. Bard Organization:118 Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Please get the poison s out of our air! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6038
Name: M. Kazinka Organization: Comment: Please consider regulating lead standards to the appropriate level that your scientists have suggested. It is your res ponsibility to keep American citizens safe from toxic living environments, and y ou know that lead is an unsafe thing to pump into the air in large quantiti es. We need you to fulfill your duties. Response: No response needed.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6036
Name: L. Middeke Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. BUT WE ARE ALL SUSCEP TIBLE TO THE TOXIC EFFECTS OF LEAD. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6035
Name: C. Tibbetts Organization: Comment: We need to know what harm is being done to our environment so we can stop those responsible and charge them to clean up the harm they have119 already done. The EPA is the group that needs the n ecessary power to control these errant companies. I strongly urge you to make the changes required so the EPA can monitor and enforce the rules to police the se major polluters. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6046
Name: R. Blaber Organization: Comment: Please require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year. Our children face so many more dangers than in years past in the toxic chemicals in the air and so il; please don't cave to industry pressure on any of them, including lead. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6458 Name: K. McCarthy Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. That said, what is yo ur purpose if not to protect the environment? Even .50 is too much lead - there shou ld be ZERO lead. Let's try to get over Bush and his shortsighted (he did not c are) policies. Those days are over - and get used to it: we want a clean earth ag ain. That's the direction to go for you - get over Bush - protect the environment. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6489
Name: E. Villamar-Robbins Organization: Comment: As the mother of a 4-year-old, soon-to-be mother of two children, I am very concerned about lead exposure. I was theref ore horrified to learn of the120 2008 EPA move to weaken monitoring of airborne lead . I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any fac ility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Mon itoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6467

Name: M. Lannen Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Wake up! Think of the autism pandemic!!! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6465 Name: K. Manning Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Lead poisoning robs c hildren of the abilities they will need for the challenges of the future. We know no safe level of lead exposure. Please act for the future! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6464
Name: K. Wallace Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any121 facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. I don't make a lot of money, but we have to do what is ecologically sound for our children, our nation and our world. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6463
Name: K. Marshall Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. When are we going to stop putting money concerns above the welfare of our citizens and the world at large? Pollution affects and hurts all of us. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6462 Name: G. King Organization: Comment: As a parent of three, I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules on airborne lead that keep public safety at the forefr ont. Specifically, I would ask the EPA to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6461
Name: C. Richardson Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy).122 Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Regulations should be about social responsibility not corporate or political pressure. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6469
Name: J. Rutherford Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. It is a shame and a c rime to allow this situation to continue and we the citizens of American require yo u to do your very best to remedy it. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6459
Name: K. Radford Organization:
Comment: WHY ISN'T LEAD BEING KEPT OUT OF OUR AIR W HEN IT IS COMMON KNOWLEDGE HOW DANGEROUS IT IS? THE EPA WA S CREATED TO PROTECT THE PEOPLE OF THIS COUNTRY FROM DANGERS LIKE THIS. YOU ARE FAILING IN YOUR JOB WHEN YOU ALLOW POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC PRESSURE TO AFFECT YOU R CARRYING OUT YOUR RESPONSIBILITIES. THEREFORE, I st rongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring a t any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy) . Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6470123 Name: K. Wilson Organization: Comment: Our kids have enough challenges from a wea k U.S. education system. We certainly do not need to add nervous sys tem damage from lead poisoning. And let's face it, corporations make dol lars their bottom line. They cannot be trusted with the health of our babies and the planet. I urge the EPA to do the maximum to monitor facilities that emit more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy) Please, for our children. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6457
Name: A. Nicklen Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. For Imperial Valley, where my family and I live, this is an important issue because my family's heal th is being impacted by the bad quality of air we have. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6456
Name: H. Fernandez Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. It is important to ke ep our air breathable. Response: Responded to in preamble.124 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6455
Name: M. Miller Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. I support any legisla tion &/or policy that takes the EPA back to being responsible for protecting the en vironment that citizens and voters live in from the corporate bottom line polic y of 'pollute now & let future generations pay later'. I know the EPA needs indust ry insiders on staff to inform policy making but they shouldn't take on the role o f lobbyists crafting weak policies that empower their former employers to pol lute freely. The EPA needs the power and the will to meet its mandate of prote cting 'us' from 'them'. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6454
Name: J. Wahl Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Given the increase in global pollution from newly industrializing countries, we need to be vigilant w here we can most effectivelyright here at home, Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6453
Name: S. Mohr Organization: Comment: Please, public health and the environment in which we live should be the priority of the EPA. We have come a long way since the pollution belching industries of the 50's and 60's. Let's not take a step backwards! I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require mon itoring at any facility that125 emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per yea r (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and wel l being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulner able to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6452
Name: K. Thate Organization:
Comment: This issue is common sense: we should not only monitor any toxin (lead) producing facilities, but find ways to reduc e their output in the first place. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require m onitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per yea r (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and wel l being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulner able to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6451 Name: M. Worthington Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. We have made great st rides in reducing the presence of lead in our homes, but now is the time to do more to reduce the lead in our environment. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6450
Name: E. Pechuzal Organization:126 Comment: I am very concerned about our increasingly contaminated water and air. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to requ ire monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead pe r year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health an d well being of our community, especially our children who are particul arly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6460 Name: K. Alsup Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Thank you for your wo rk on everyone's behalf. It does and will not go unnoticed. Again, thank you. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6479
Name: J. Abrams Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity and don't deserve to b e treated with such disregard. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6406
Name: D. Bonetti Organization: Comment: I live downwind of a coal plant and feel i ts effects. I strongly urge127 the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Mon itoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6487
Name: W. Allen Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. And in case you all h ave not thought about how much air is being polluted by war, take a long look at the effects on the people from Vietnam! And the wars after that..... Who is r unning this world? Is it worth the pay offs to destroy the earth and innocent live s!? And if the government is not helping to clean up the air we breathe, then at least give us National Health to deal with it! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6486
Name: V. Kime Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Please note that I live in a "superfund" area (Anaconda, M T)and I know firsthand what damage happens when lead is allowed to spew out all over the place. The soil in my yard contains 2500 ppm lead - I can't grow any e dible plants - and in summer the dust blows everywhere! I work with child ren and many of them show signs of lead poisoning. Monitoring this dange rous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especia lly our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.128 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6485
Name: V. Cothroll Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Please take action no w to protect our children and our environment. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6484
Name: M. Hernandez Organization: Comment: Science has proven to us time and again th e dangers of lead to our bodies. It is vital that the EPA tracks any source of environmental lead to ensure the health and safety of all living things, but esp ecially our children. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring a t any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy) . Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6483 Name: M. Thompson Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the Environmental Protecti on Agency to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that spews mo re than half a ton of lead into the atmosphere per year. Monitoring this dangerous pollution will lead to the improvement of the health and well being of our soc iety. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6482129 Name: M. Chapman Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Businesses certainly have the ability to control the lead emissions, just not the will as it will limit their profits. Our health and the health of our children and grandchildren is more im portant than corporations' profits. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6468 Name: E. O'Malley Organization: Comment: For the health and well-being of every Ame rican, especially our children, I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6480
Name: L. Levine Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. So many people I know have lead poisoning. How can we disregard such a blatant health risk? Response: Responded to in preamble.130 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6447
Name: E. Alexander Organization: Comment: Corporations that make profits from the pr oduction of materials with dangerous byproducts should also be responsible for the containment and long term safe disposal of those byproducts. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6478
Name: M. Hawks Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. LESS LEAD IS THE ONLY VIABLE ACTION TO TAKE! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6477 Name: S. Dupont Organization: Comment: Enact strong airborne lead monitoring stan dards!! Reducing this dangerous pollution will improve the health and wel l being of our community, especially our children, who are particularly vulne rable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6476131 Name: M. Koch Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. We need to monitor in order to know when and who we need to limit! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6475
Name: L. Gale Organization: Comment: I urge the EPA to promote public health an d clean air by enacting stronger rules to require monitoring at facilities that emit airborne lead. Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our communities, especially children who are partic ularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. The EPA's first prior ity as a true protection agency should be a safe environment for humans, animals an d plant species that depend on it. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6474
Name: M. McFarland Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Just keep in mind... if we kill the planet, the economy, lousy airlines, cheating CEOs will be rela tively unimportant. Response: Responded to in preamble.132 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6473
Name: L. Priceman Organization: Comment: As a healthcare professional I have seen t he effects of lead on the health and learning abilities of our children Remov ing lead has had a very positive result of many people. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than hal f a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our childre n who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6472
Name: K. Sinclair-Smith Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Lead in glazes on pot tery wrecked one civilization. Knowing that, why would those who are supposed to l ead the country, damage our civilization? Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6471
Name: A. Babcock Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. The monitoring of haz ards to public health safety seems to me to be one of your primary missions. Why ever in this mixed up world would you imagine that corporations have publ ic safety as a higher calling than their bottom line? The monitoring and control of corporate self133 interest at the expense of the public safety and he alth IS your reason for existence (in my opinion). It is my plea to you to help this country get back on track and be an advocate for the public. Thank you for your time and attention Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6481 Name: M. Perry Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and wellbeing of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. With known hazards su ch as lead, it is the responsibility of the government to protect its cit izens anywhere the wind blows in our nation. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6415
Name: E. Christiee Organization: Comment: Too many of our young children are brain d amaged due to exposure to lead. Please, I strongly urge the EPA to enact r ules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of air borne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6424
Name: J. Vick Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Lead134 is an important pollutant to monitor, particularly given its harmful effects on children. Thank you. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6423
Name: B. Williams-Pemberton Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Let's make sure our g randchildren are healthy! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6422

Name: J. Watson Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Let's go Organic/ Sol ar / and Green to help the Earth environment for the health of future generati ons!~!! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6421

Name: J. Mozenter Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. It is critical that t hese rules get added to EPA135 regulations immediately so that this policy can beg in to take effect. This is common sense science, it is a civic imperative and it is a continuing step toward a more sustainable and healthy environment which we can all live in safely. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6420
Name: J. Killian Organization: Comment: Not monitoring a known health hazard? TOTA LLY ABSURD. Whatever we decide about permitting emissions, it's irresponsible to not even know how much is being put into our air. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits mo re than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6419
Name: J. Schneidt Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Lead is still an issu e!! Please monitor lead and work to lower levels in our air!! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6418
Name: T. Lamb Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy).136 Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. There is a growing nu mber of people with chemical sensitivities, and lead in the air (even a t levels currently permitted) prevent these people from living full lives and con tributes to these statistics. Please don't make it worse for all of us. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6449 Name: A. Philippus Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits lead and other pollutants. We m ust do what we can to protect the people and our environment from these toxins. F urthermore, discovery of unhealthy emissions needs to lead to strong sanctio ns against polluters. There is no excuse, no ignorance of the harmful effects of t hese toxins in this day and age. Response: Monitoring at all sources of Pb is both i mpractical (there are well over 100,000 facilities that emit some amount of Pb ) and unjustifiable. Very small sources of Pb have no potential to exceed the Pb NAAQS which was established at a level that protects public health with a margin of safety. The emission threshold finalized in this rule is intend ed to identify sources of Pb that have the potential to exceed the Pb NAAQS.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6416

Name: L. Lee Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. We know how important it is to reduce exposure to lead and that no amount of lead is healthy. Your jo b is to protect the environment, and thereby protect the people. That, not protecting industry, should be your primary goal. Response: Responded to in preamble.137 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6427 Name: E. Fry Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. We're worried about t he lead in the air we breathe and in the soil of our vegetable garden from airbor ne lead. We live close to a small airport. Planes landing there use leaded gaso line. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6414 Name: D. Wiley Organization:
Comment: It's time for the EPA to enact rules to re quire stricter monitoring of lead. It's in our air at too high of rates. We took it out of paint, we're taking it out of toys - now let's get it out of the air. Enact th e stricter rules. Response: No response needed.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6413
Name: J. Woodford Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Lead is only one of m any toxins given to young children without their knowledge or consent by indu stry, at the expense of their health, learning, and behavior. There is no accepta ble level of poison, and we cannot allow anyone, especially vulnerable small ch ildren, to be slowly killed by these chemicals such as lead. Please make an eff ort to act responsibly by starting to enact reasonable limits on hazardous ai rborne pollutants, particularly lead. Response: Responded to in preamble.138 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6412

Name: J. Brown Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. I live in an industri al area, and I know first hand that children in this area tend to score lower than those who live further away. Why should this even be an issue? We have known for hundreds of years that lead is toxic, so why is it in our water and our ai r? Please undo the damage of the Bush administration and make American air safe again. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6411

Name: R. Kanost Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. I live near Galveston Bay and I don't have to look too closely to see the price we are paying for lax regulations. My favorite bay fish has been shown to contain dangerous amounts of organic pollutants so that a health advisory has been issued to warn those who would eat it. We have allowed big businesses to buy our laws for too long . It's time to let them know that they can clean up or shut down. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6410
Name: J. Soffer Organization: Comment: Now is not the time to weaken air quality rules. We've made a lot of progress on removing lead from paints, let's keep i t out of the air! It is extremely139 harmful to all life, and we pay the cost in health care (cancer, lung issues, brain and nervous disorders) if we allow industry to cont aminate our resources that affect our health. Response: No response needed.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6409 Name: J. H. Maguire Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Given the known toxicity of lead, I would urge monitoring of any facility that emits even a hundred pounds of lead a year, since the lea d can accumulate and contaminate areas within the "shadow" of the source spewing the toxin. Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6408
Name: T. Abel Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. All our lives depend on a healthier environment to give us a better chance for longer survival. Reduci ng toxic chemicals in our environment today will enhance and extend our lives today and tomorrow. Please restore strong rules and policies on monitor ing our large-scale sources of airborne lead and other toxic chemicals. Yours and my life depend on swift action TODAY! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6407140 Name: S. Gambill Organization: Comment: This is really a no-brainer. The EPA osten sibly exists to protect the environment. So, do your job. Big industry politics likes to make issues sound complicated as a smoke-screen for their own agendas . This country was founded on the ideal of the common good, of a gover nment by, for, and of the people. So do what's necessary to protect the healt h and safety of the American people, and especially our children. Do your job. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility t hat emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring thi s dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6417
Name: M. Sulander Organization: Comment: It's time for the EPA to protect Americans from lead. The EPA must require air monitoring for lead wherever a facility may be producing harmful levels of lead into the air. I strongly urge the EP A to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than hal f a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our childre n who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6435
Name: K. Graham Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). As a teacher, I see the consequences of lead poisoning o n inner city students---a loss of human capital that costs us all. Response: Responded to in preamble.141 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6490 Name: A. K. Brady Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. I have a preschool ch ild who had high lead levels at 12 months old despite the lack of lead paint on the inside or outside of our home. Her pediatrician suspects lead was present in the soil around our home, and possibly the air we breathe. My daughter is sma ll for her age, and possibly more vulnerable to environmental toxins. We do not yet know if her lead poisoning will have long term effects on her mental or physical development. Please enact stronger monitoring standards to regul ate industrial airborne lead pollution. I would hate to see another family go th rough what mine has--having a child damaged by environmental poisoning. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6446 Name: T. Wijnterp Organization:
Comment: that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). If the EPA does not monitor, and leaves the matter to the companies that produce the airborne lead, then the whole reason for an Env ironmental Protection Agency is removed. This is your job, ladies and gen tlemen of the EPA. This is what I pay taxes for. Please make sure the air and the environment stay clean, you have all our gratitude! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6445

Name: E. Moore Organization: Comment: It is unconscionable to knowingly allow ou r nation's children to be exposed to unsafe levels of lead. I strongly urge t he EPA to enact rules to142 require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6444 Name: B. Huntsberger Organization: Comment: I urge the EPA to enact rules to require s tricter monitoring of airborne lead. This dangerous pollution harms the h ealth and well being of our community, especially our children who are particul arly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6443

Name: J. Hart Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. We already have a pro blem in Ventura county, and specifically in Oxnard, with EPA not doing a cleanu p on toxic waste, so let's not allow any more. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6442
Name: S. Nims Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of143 our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. The whole world is at risk of being slowly poisoned by these toxins, not just the poor familie s in the immediate area of the polluters. No country is safe. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6441
Name: P. Holt Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. It is a known fact th at Lead is dangerous for our environment, both plant and animal...mankind! Pleas e do what is the right thing to do! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6439
Name: H. Drubin Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. After all, do you rea lly think we can continue to pour chemical waste and poisons into the air withou t it eventually having a bad effect on us all??? Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6425

Name: E. Moreno Organization:144 Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. My daughter (now 2) w as exposed to lead when she was just 9 months old. Since then, I have made it my mission to protect her from this toxin in whatever way I can. I can hire l ead-certified contractors to make our house safe, I can only buy toys and produc ts that I know are lead-free, but to protect the air she breathes I need help fro m the EPA. Please help us and all children who are at risk. It is devastating tha t health and behavior problems are suffered by children at even low levels of lead exposure. But what is even worse is that those problems are PREVENTABLE but ar en't being prevented. Please help. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6436

Name: D. Hanson Organization: Comment: I live downwind from 2 coal generators. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility t hat emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring thi s dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6426

Name: E. Yeomans Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. My father's long-term exposure to industrial pollutants was a big factor in causing the cancer t hat killed him; I feel a personal responsibility to speak out in support of close mon itoring of all known sources of pollution that threaten our health and/or the he alth of the Earth.145 Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6434

Name: S. Stone Organization: Comment: When I was a child, homes were painted wit h lead based paints... When the adults of that day clearly realized the da ngers it imposed upon our health it was no longer permitted... and yet all th ese years later, my grandchildren and I are still breathing it! Why doe s Washington not realize why most of the country is beyond fed up, and are so an gry? Are they too suffering the effects of having breathed in too much lead? On e wonders why they don't "get it" no matter how many times we beg them to CA RE ABOUT THE PEOPLE more than the money. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than hal f a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our childre n who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6433 Name: A. Smigelsky Organization: Comment: Ladies & Gentleman - Please, please, pleas e take your positions seriously. I request that the EPA use it's position to enact commonsense & appropriate rules regarding lead emitted into the a ir. I ask this for my health, for my children's health, and that of my unborn grandch ildren. It's time our generation start acting responsibly and hold corpor ations accountable. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require mon itoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per yea r (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and wel l being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulner able to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6432146 Name: A. Cheek Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. For the sake of the m ost vulnerable among us, I strongly urge you to take this action. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6431 Name: F. Mackey Organization: Comment: monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Thank you for your thoughtful consideration. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6430
Name: E. Bartlett Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Companies may claim t hey can't afford to meet the rules that would protect our air, but the country c an't afford to damage its children and its future. Please take your responsib ilities seriously and enact and enforce the rules necessary to protect us all. Response: Responded to in preamble.147 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6429
Name: E. Fuchs Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Please protect our he alth, and your health. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6428

Name: A. Buster Organization:
Comment: I am one of hundreds of thousands of adult s who have been diagnosed with chronic upper respiratory conditions . I do not smoke, nor do I work in a dangerous environment. The environment it self has become problematic. Too many years of lax regulation has l ed to air that is making us sick. I fear for children because childhood asthma is on the rise. Why is it so difficult to understand that air pollution is destr oying the health of Americans? Have we truly given ourselves over to greed to the extent that human life no longer matters? At a time when the public itself is seeking limitations on public exposure to smoking because we know by experience a s well as by science that second-hand smoke is as dangerous as smoking itself , why, why, why are we not applying those same principles, those same less ons to the pollution emitted by industry? I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. If people are willing to impose bans on smoking, what makes you think they would not want limits on industrial pollution? We all want to be healthier, to safeguard the health o f our children and grandchildren. Please keep toxic amounts of lead ou t of our air now! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6448
Name: I. Franchi and I. Arce148 Organization: Comment: Your decision will help ensure compliance with the EPA's strong new health-based standards to protect communities a gainst airborne lead, in keeping with your agency's own analysis showing tha t facilities emitting half a ton or more of lead a year can result in violations of the health-based standard. I hope that you adopt this strong standard and resist any efforts to weaken these monitoring requirements. I also urge the EPA to ens ure that monitoring near old sources of lead pollution, such as the dust near ro adways and old and closed industrial facilities that can contribute to lead a ir pollution, is included in state monitoring plans. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6250 Name: D. Slayter Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Please stop the unreg ulated madness. Monitoring is the only way to know how bad the lead pollution is. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6542
Name: D. Behne Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. I have almost lost fa ith in US agencies anymore. What was anyone thinking when things like this got passed? How bad do we have to destroy everything before THE RIGHT THINGS get done? It would be easier to do it NOW than wait until it is so out-of -hand that it will be a MAJOR sacrifice that we need to do to correct our past mi stakes. When will the "let the next guy deal with it" attitude end and responsibil ity finally kick in. Please do149 the right thing this time before it gets to be too late! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6488

Name: D. Foster Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Children are especially vulnerable to lead toxicity ; we must monitor this dangerous pollution to improve the health and well being of our future Americans. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6550
Name: R. Mack Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Seriously! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6549
Name: P. Bellonci and G. Bellonci Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. This is such a "no-br ainer" - Of course we need to keep toxins out of our air! After all, we're all br eathing. (aren't you?)150 Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6548
Name: C. Zulick Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). The health of our citizens is more important than the w ealth of the few. Please do what is best for Americans and properly monitor lea d levels in our air. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6547
Name: A. Winston Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. FOR PETE'S SAKE, THIS IS A NO-BRAINER! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6546 Name: C. Jennings Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. As a community health RN and a Nursing Educator, I can tell you that what we "pay for" tod ay will benefit us down the road. We are suffering from decades of neglect in t his area! Put "Protection" b Response: Responded to in preamble.151 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6545 Name: C. Lepley Organization: Comment: I urge the EPA to enact rules to require m onitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead pe r year (.50 tpy). Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6552
Name: R. Defferante Organization:
Comment: Airborne lead is toxic and can cause a hos t of medical problems, especially in children who are more susceptible to the harmful effects of lead exposure. Some of the problems it causes include lo wer IQ, behavioral problems, brain damage, kidney damage and cardiovas cular injury. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring a t any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy) . Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6543
Name: C. Fribance Organization: Comment: In our local lakes, we can't eat most of t he fish that are caught because of lead. This is true for many of the lakes in Wisconsin and across the country. Studies also show that Native Americans wh o eat lots of fish have children whose mental abilities are affected by lea d poisoning. Clearly there are other impacts of lead upon us and our environment. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility t hat emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring thi s dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. We need action before it is too late! Response: Responded to in preamble.152 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6553 Name: A. Sorg Organization:
Comment: We have two kids with monitored blood lead levels with no known source for the exposure. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than hal f a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our childre n who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6541
Name: D. Kornblum Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Let's undo the Bush/C heney damage before it's too late, again. The people are with you. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6540

Name: D. Moore Organization: Comment: I urge the EPA to enact rules to require m onitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead pe r year (.50 tpy). Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6539 Name: D. Eyermann153 Organization: Comment: I strongly DEMAND the EPA to enact rules t o require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of air borne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. How many Americans do we have to read about with cancers, miscarriages, premature death of elde rly before you people who are supposed to be the Watchdogs of our Quality of Life do your job???!!! I'm more radical; I advocate a total "Dump the Republic an & sympathetic Democrat incumbents" ...which "movement" may be gai ning momentum! People who fail to act in the greater society's bet ter interest might find themselves dismissed soon I hope !!!! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6538 Name: S. Dewey Organization: Comment: It is time--past time--to start undoing th e damage that the Bush administration did to our regulations protecting pu blic health and the environment. Lead pollution in the United States ha s been historically underregulated for more than a century due to ongoi ng pressure from industry lobbies. This is a shameful state of affairs, and b eneath the dignity of an advanced modern democratic nation. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6537 Name: D. Elllinger Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the154 risks posed by lead toxicity. Help reduce our healt hcare costs by doing your part! You too are eating food laden with chemicals due to air and ground pollution. Do you have an expectation of a long and high quality life? Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6536
Name: D. deForest Organization:
Comment: I am concerned about the toxic lead in our air and I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any fac ility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Mon itoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. As an RN, who is well aware of the health risks to children from being exposed to unnecessary levels of lead and other metals, I b elieve it is wrong for the government to allow this pollution to continue. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6535 Name: D. Sperling-Schmidt Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Just this morning the re was an article in the LA Times about Target stores pulling a teddy bear due to concerns about high lead content. Maybe stronger standards starting at home can get the ball rolling on higher standards around the world. Time for us to t ake the lead(leed) and get the lead out of the air. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6534
Name: T. Brittian155 Organization: Comment: The lax regulation on lead is an outrage. We know that lead LOWERS IQ IN CHILDREN (and adults), that it is a ne urotoxin. We've known about this poison since the Romans made their mista kes with lead pipes. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require mon itoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per yea r (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and wel l being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulner able to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6544
Name: C. Fishburn Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. FOR MANY OF US, OUR L IVES ARE BEING SHORTENED BY THE POOR AIR QUALITY. DON'T CAVE IN TO THOSE IN INDUSTRY WHO BENEFIT FROM LAX REGULATIONS. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6564
Name: R. Dueck Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. It comes down to this ... do we care one wit about future generations? Response: Responded to in preamble.156 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6575

Name: C. Trent Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Airborne lead is toxic and can cause many medical p roblems, especially in children who are more susceptible to the bad effect s of lead exposure. We need to be able to more closely monitor large-scale sour ces of airborne lead such as factories and smelting plants. Please make a rule t hat lowers the amount of pollution allowed in our air. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6573 Name: A. Magennis Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Lead has been clearly demonstrated to impair the development of children, and it is poor children, l iving in the old urban neighborhoods that are in the worst settings and ha ve the highest lead levels in their blood. Also at risk are those who live in clo se proximity to lead-producing industries. It is not that difficult to pass legisl ation to clean up the air and get the lead out! I'm so, so tired of the dirty air (and wa ter) that we continue to live in, and it is not necessary! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6572
Name: M. Oaks Organization: Comment: Hello, I urge the EPA to enact rules to re quire monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Such rules should have already been established and it i s alarming that there are no such rules. Monitoring this dangerous pollution wil l improve the health and157 well being of our community, especially our childre n who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. If we care about our children the decision to make is obvious. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6571

Name: J. Moore Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Actually, I'm shocked that this is not more tightly regulated and monitored. We know the affects of lea d. I realize that as an agency, the EPA had it's foundation undermined duri ng the Bush administration. It is time now to make bold steps i n protecting the public. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6570

Name: G. Carver Organization:
Comment: I don't think our children should have to suffer brain or kidney damage just because they had the misfortune(?) to b e "born in the USA". I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require mon itoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per yea r (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and wel l being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulner able to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6569
Name: C. Wolstenholme Organization:158 Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. No amount of money sa ved by not requiring monitoring can make up for the mental dullness or r etardation that comes along with lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6567

Name: R. Cano Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Please do the right t hing for us, for once. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6551 Name: B. Tzigany Organization: Comment: Clean air seems like such a basic right. W hy shouldn't we do everything we can to have a livable habitat? I stro ngly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that em its more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this d angerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6565 Name: R. Trickey Organization:159 Comment: The EPA is the ENVIRONMENTAL Pro, not the Industrial Profit and Greed Protection Agency. We the people, rely on you and expect you to perform the function for which you were created by law. It is time to enact regulations that will protect the health of today's and tomorrow's children. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require mon itoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per yea r (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and wel l being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulner able to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6531
Name: P. Rider Organization: Comment: Do we want to follow the Roman Empire. A s trong theory about the demise of Roman leadership was poisoning from lead in the empire's famed aqueduct pipes. I strongly urge the EPA to enact ru les to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of air borne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6563
Name: R. Mills Organization: Comment: Protecting the public from dangerous emiss ions is one of the responsibilities of the EPA; therefore, I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.160 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6561

Name: R. Ware Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. The risks of lead poi soning, especially to the developing brains of children, have been well estab lished. To insure such dangers are minimized a return to the previous stan dard of .50 tpy is essential. No price can be placed on the maintenance of public health and especially the safety of our children. I believe mandatory monitor ing of this dangerous pollution and any other such dangers to our health is essential. I ask you to return to the former standards and, if anything, in crease the monitoring of such dangerous emission. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6560

Name: E. House Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. We count on the EPA t o protect us! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6558
Name: R. McGuire Organization: Comment: Lead pollution is dangerous to all, especi ally for our children. I strongly support the EPA's enacting rules to be abl e to monitor facilities emitting more than a half a ton of airborne lead pe r year. Thank you for considering my comments. Response: Responded to in preamble.161 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6557

Name: R. Conn Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. It seems that whateve r the Bush administration has done has endangered the military, financial, enviro nmental. physical (ours) health of our country. We must prosecute! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6556
Name: R. Grzeskowiak Organization: Comment: I, as a heavy metals victim, strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. While you are at it, require monitoring for ALL heavy metals. Thank you. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6555

Name: R. Hartman Organization: Comment: Hey, pollution is fraud. It is a way for b usinesses to pass along legitimate costs of doing business to others downst ream. Do your job and protect us from fraudulent practices such as dumpin g toxic fumes into the air. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require mon itoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per yea r (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and wel l being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulner able to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.162 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6554 Name: R. Heffelfinger Organization: Comment: I have been dealing with lead poisoning fo r the past 3+ years. I have radiation type burns on my face and neck. I have th e tell tale blue 'spot' in my mouth that denotes lead poisoning. Using a lead ref erence range of<=1.4 Urinalysis shows I am 24.9. I would like to outlive my 85 year old parents in the nursing home and I would love to live to see the bi rth of my first grandchild this September. PLEASE STOP POLLUTING THE AIR I BREATHE. Could we knock off the toxic metal contaminates in our air, water and soil-please! I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require mon itoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per yea r (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and wel l being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulner able to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6566

Name: R. Moser Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. We can control (to a certain extent) what we eat and drink, but the air we breathe is another matter . Is it wise to ignore this threat now and then have to pay higher medical costs later ? Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6501 Name: N. Adams-Coga Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy).163 Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. It is time for my ele cted officials to put the welfare of actual breathing persons before the profits of c orporate "persons." Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6510
Name: C. Elliott Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Nobody has a right to poison the air I breathe! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6509
Name: C. Holmes Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Help protect the air WE ALL HAVE to breathe!! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6508
Name: D. Saunkeah Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits airborne lead. Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of Earth and it's inhabitants!164 Response: Monitoring at all sources of Pb is both i mpractical (there are well over 100,000 facilities that emit some amount of Pb ) and unjustifiable. Very small sources of Pb have no potential to exceed the Pb NAAQS which was established at a level that protects public health with a margin of safety. The emission threshold finalized in this rule is intend ed to identify sources of Pb that have the potential to exceed the Pb NAAQS.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6507 Name: D. Tharp Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. It's imperative that the EPA live up to its mission of protecting the American public from the environment al hazards unleashed by the lax and politicized policies of the Bush admini stration. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6506
Name: D. Renfrew Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. As a researcher dedic ated to the health effects of lead in the developing world, I know first hand the dangers caused by lead, and the necessity of a strong regulatory framework to c ontrol and monitor pollution in all its forms. Lead bio-accumulates in the organ ism, making it of utmost urgency to address and mitigate ALL the possible so urces and pathways of environmental lead exposure. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6505165 Name: W. James Organization: Comment: Please enact rules to require monitoring a t any facility that emits more than .50 tpy. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6504 Name: J. Kolberg Organization: Comment: As an early childhood Special Educator, I implore you to keep the lead out of our air! I strongly urge the EPA to ena ct rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6533
Name: T. Clements Organization: Comment: I have been spending the last two years wo rking hard to get toxins out of my body. I strongly urge the EPA to enact ru les to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of air borne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6502
Name: B. Jackson Organization: Comment: The Bush administration had its priorities backward and promoted166 industry over the environment and public health. Wh ereas the EPA's own technical analysis in 2008 supported monitoring any source of lead that emitted more than half a ton of lead into the air per year (.50 tpy), Bush era officials were able to get the EPA to only require monitoring of sources that emitted double that amount (1.00 tpy). I resent his insensi tive effort to continue fouling our air and I want it stopped. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than hal f a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our childre n who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6513

Name: C. Warren Organization: Comment: I am writing to urge the EPA to enact rule s to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of air borne lead per year (.50 tpy). The deleterious health effects of lead pollution, e specially to children, is well established. To fail to monitor this dangerous poll ution would, I believe, amount to negligence on the part of a public agency established to protect the nation's environment and its health. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6500

Name: C. Starr Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. We must make every ef fort to correct the damage we have done and are doing to the planet and public health, regardless of the difficulty. Life depends on it. Thank you for all y our efforts. Response: Responded to in preamble.167 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6499
Name: C. Solstad Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollutant will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Our children deserve to live without this threat to their health. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6497
Name: C. Cahill Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6496
Name: B. Whitaker Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Please take action no w to monitor these lead emitting facilities. Thank you. Sincerely, Barbara Whitaker, Tucson, Arizona Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6495168 Name: B. Davidson Organization: Comment: Pb! Pb! Pb! everywhere! What kind of PROTE CTION is it that your agency does??? If ANYONE is still there that's wort h their diploma & and has any conscience they will work to monitor and regula te Pb to SAFE HUMAN levels. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to r equire monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6494
Name: B. Biehl Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Please enact strong a irborne lead standards Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6492

Name: A. Foster Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. As a teacher, I am co nstantly reminded of the devastating effects of lead exposure to small child ren. Sadly, they are often unable to learn because of memory loss caused by th e lead. It's so sad to think that we know about these dangers. We must do everyt hing we can to prevent this!! Response: Responded to in preamble.169 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6491

Name: Organization:
Comment: All air standards from the EPA are too lax for our health and safety. Please begin returning safeguards by addressing the issue of lead in the air we all breathe. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6503
Name: A. Holder Organization: Comment: As one who lived in and struggled to raise a family in the polluted air of an ASARCO plant, I support regulations that monitor air at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead pe r year (.50 tpy). For my family, it is too late; I currently suffer from "se vere severe" emphysema; my daughter, who was born with one lung, refuses to li ve here. Monitoring dangerous pollution would have given us both a bett er chance at living without oxygen and medications that severely interfere with our well being. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6521
Name: W. Frisbie Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Get a spine! I am out raged that any "public servant" would accept changes that actually endange r the public they are supposed to be serving. Make it tougher to poison u s, for God's sake!170 Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6438

Name: H. Bowman Organization: Comment: Thank you for taking the time to listen to this email I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Mon itoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6530
Name: T. Buchheim Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. In order to reduce th e harmful effects of lead we need to know exactly where (and in what quantities) lead is being released into the environment. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6529

Name: C. Towns Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. I am so disappointed in some recent decisions by the EPA, particularly with respect to mountain top clearing for the coal171 industry. Please remember what your responsibility is and see to it that our environment has the strictest protection laws avail able!!!! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6528
Name: N. Casurella Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Geez, this is a no br ainer. What is the downside? Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6527
Name: B. Castalia Organization: Comment: Restoring and strengthing EPA rules that r equire monitoring at any facility that emits airborne lead is, quite simply, in the public interest. Polluting industries will not, of course, see such rules in t heir interests (unless they are socially responsible). So the decision is straightf orward: Serve the interests of the public in a healthy living environment, or the interests of privately owned industrial businesses in maximizing their profits. When it comes to a decision, who's interests are you serving? Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6526
Name: B. Sabo Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). The Environmental Protection Agency is supposed to do w hat its name states - protect the environment. By revisiting the rules th at weakened monitoring of172 large-scale sources of airborne lead, you would be acting in the best interests of the citizenry rather than the interests of factorie s and smelting plants. The harmful impacts of airborne lead are well known. Yo u have the chance to strengthen rules that would better the health of Am ericans. Please, enact strong monitoring rules concerning airborne lead that will protect our health. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6525
Name: B. Barber Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. We're concerned about healthcare, but won't monitor and prevent the dumping of pollutants into the air that we know are harmful. Get your priorities in order. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6524
Name: B. Galbreath Organization: Comment: As a mother and grandmother, I strongly ur ge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits mo re than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6511
Name: C. Miller Organization: Comment: Let science, not politics, dictate monitor ing requirements. If the173 EPA's impartial scientific analysis says that any s ource emitting half a ton a year of lead needs to be monitored for compliance, then that's what we should do. Roll back the Bush administration's politically motivated doubling of that limit. Let's get back to basing our policy on solid science. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6522 Name: B. Murphey Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. It's incomprehensible that we should even have to plead - it is as simple as doing the right thing, f or our children, for generations of children and for this planet earth. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6512 Name: C. Haug Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. As a child in the 195 0s, before lead was removed from paint and gasoline, I was exposed to toxic lev els of lead, which I still carry in my bones and other parts of my body. For the las t 10 years, I have been undergoing chelation to remove the lead, but it is proving difficult. I have osteoporosis, which I believe is due to the lead in my bones. Please, protect future generations by limiting lead in our air. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6520174 Name: Z. Cochran Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. As a parent of young children I urge you to enact stricter practices for monitoring the lead that ind ustry releases into the air we all share. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6519
Name: B. Schor Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially people like me who are pl agued by asthma triggered by air toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6518
Name: B. Porter and P. Porter Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. WHY DO WE BOTHER TO S TUDY AND MEASURE THE EFFECTS OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS IF WE AR E UNWILLING TO CONTROL AND LIMIT THEM TO THE "PROPER" SAFE LEVELS? Response: Responded to in preamble.175 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6517

Name: W. Ince Organization: Comment: Let's keep toxic lead out of our air! I st rongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that em its more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this d angerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6516
Name: V. Nelson Organization: Comment: All it takes is a desire to really live, i nstead of just survive. You have that desire and you are in a position to use your p ower to enhance all life. (Yes, even the people employed in industry will be better for it.) I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any fac ility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Mon itoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6515
Name: B. Unrath Organization: Comment: I strongly urge, beg and plead with the EP A to enact rules to require monitoring at ALL facilities that emit more than ha lf a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our childre n who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Thi nk of the money saved on future health costs if we eliminate this volume of air pollution now! Response: Responded to in preamble.176 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6514
Name: P. Walker Organization: Comment: The EPA absolutely needs to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of air borne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially children who are particul arly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity, which we know results in lo wer IQs, among other negative health effects. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6532
Name: T. Stahl Organization: Comment: I have 3+ grandchildren who I want to stay healthy and be able to grow. Lead in the air is bad for them. I strongly u rge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6523
Name: B. Katzoff Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Please do the right thing to care for the children of our country and enact this needed oversight. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6303177 Name: M. Fitzgibbon Organization:
Comment: Facilities emit more than half a ton of ai rborne lead per year (.50 tpy) should receive a tax break or grant for monito ring and reducing their emission of this element. Otherwise, these plants a nd their jobs will just move to India or China. The taxpayer, which benefits fro m products from these plants should just be forced to pay for what they don't pa y for in the end price of the product. Monitoring this dangerous pollution will i mprove the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6338
Name: P. Swackhamer Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Lack of attention to the environment and health of all on this planet by some administrations in the p ast does not mean that we have to continue this disregard. As more and more p eople inhabit this planet, we must reduce the effects of pollutants in our env ironment. Please do your part to decrease the amount of lead in our environment. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6314 Name: N. Kauper Organization: Comment: We need you to protect us from harmful che mical particles in the air we all breathe. I call on the EPA to do the job ent rusted to them by the public and enact rules to require monitoring at any facili ty that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Good air quality is of the utmost importance to everyone wit h lungs. Please enact these178 monitoring rules. Lives depend on it. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6312
Name: M. Jelf Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to require monitor ing at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per yea r. The greatest threat to the future of the Republic is stupidity, of which lead poisoning is both the cause and effect. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6311
Name: V. Garcia-Kalton Organization:
Comment: While it would be in the best interests of every human being to stop the emission of any toxic substance into our atmosp here (how can there be "safe" amounts?) I strongly urge the EPA to enact r ules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of air borne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Please consider putti ng in place rules/laws that cannot be undermined by politics to the detriment o f our collective health. Common sense tells us that we do not require life-t imes of research to prove the harm that is obvious. Thank you for your kind consi deration. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6405
Name: C. Clarke Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of179 our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Please choose health over profit. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6309
Name: G. Hirst Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Pass laws that will k eep our air safe and clean. Protect our childrens' lives by giving them clean a ir to breathe. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6440

Name: K. Gust Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. EPA is supposed to st and for an Agency that Protects the Environment. Can't do that without the power to monitor the air we breathe from toxic lead. Hard to educate children w hen they're becoming slowly brain damaged. Please get this done. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6307
Name: G. Sterritt Organization: Comment: I think the EPA should require monitoring at all sites that emit significant quantities of lead. If levels exceed mo re than half a ton of airborne180 lead per year (.50 tpy) then it is important to est ablish the volume of emissions and warn people exposed to this hazard downwind tha t they need to be on the outlook for symptoms of lead poisoning, especially in children who are most vulnerable. Bring this dangerous pollution under co ntrol to improve the health and well being of our community! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6316 Name: S. Lippman Organization: Comment: I am writing to ask you at the EPA to pass rules that would require monitoring whenever an industry releases over half a ton, or .50 tpy, of airborne lead per year. Lead is very dangerous, especially t o children. There is no way the long-term costs to people in terms of medical a nd social costs of this brain toxin would be less than the cost to industry to ke ep lead out of people. When industries are so powerful that they are able to ke ep themselves from being regulated, it is just a way of shifting their costs from their own balance sheets and onto the burdens and costs borne by families. P lease pass strong regulations against lead. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6304

Name: M. Fox Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. We have a responsibil ity to our future generations. Instead, what we are doing is sacrificing their hea lth and well-being to satisfy the greed of our companies. If you cannot care abou t my children or your neighbor's children, at least demonstrate that you care about your own children and grandchildren. Response: Responded to in preamble.181 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6317
Name: B. Rush Organization: Comment: Did you know that lead poisoning is one of the primary factors leading to the fall of the Roman Empire? Perhaps it helps explain why so many Americans are so dumb today. I strongly urge the EP A to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than hal f a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our childre n who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6302
Name: B. Nicol Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. The Bush administrati on had its priorities backward and promoted industry over the environment and public health. Whereas the EPA's own technical analysis in 2008 su pported monitoring any source of lead that emitted more than half a ton of lead into the air per year (.50 tpy), Bush era officials were able to get the EPA t o only require monitoring of sources that emitted double that amount (1.00 tpy). This dramatically undermined the EPA's ability to ensure the surround ing communities were not exposed to harmful amounts of lead. We now have a c hance to fix one of the problems caused by the Bush administration's desire to prioritize the interests of dirty polluters over everyone else's health and saf ety. Don't let the polluters put pressure on the EPA to keep the rules the same. Air borne lead is toxic and can cause a host of medical problems, especially in chi ldren who are more susceptible to the harmful effects of lead exposure . Some of the problems it causes include lower IQ, behavioral problems, brain damage, kidney damage and cardiovascular injury. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6301182 Name: C. Jenner Organization: Comment: The fact that any person would put industr y and economics over humanity and safety is absolutely sickening. The mi staken Bush-era policies must be undone, immediately! I strongly urge the EP A to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than hal f a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our childre n who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6300
Name: A. Kintree Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits airborne lead. Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Lead ingestion causes reduced IQ and learning disabiliti es. We need all the brainpower we can get to work with the challenges w e face today. Response: Monitoring at all sources of Pb is both i mpractical (there are well over 100,000 facilities that emit some amount of Pb ) and unjustifiable. Very small sources of Pb have no potential to exceed the Pb NAAQS which was established at a level that protects public health with a margin of safety. The emission threshold finalized in this rule is intend ed to identify sources of Pb that have the potential to exceed the Pb NAAQS.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6299
Name: C. O. Thomas Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. We only have one sky and I consider it the very purpose of the Environmental Protection Agency to p rotect our sky for all183 people and not let it be ruined by those who see do llar signs instead of breathable, healthy air. Thank you. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6298 Name: C. Lay Organization: Comment: It is important that the EPA enact rules t hat require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of air borne lead per year (.50 tpy). I am a mother of two children and know that children are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. A child's body will absorb more lead through inhalation than by eating paint chips. As a parent living in a building built in the 1920's, I am expected to maintain the paint in my h ome so that it does not chip and expose my children to lead paint. I expect the government to protect my children from lead that is airborne. I have no cont rol over what industries emit into the air. The EPA has this ability and should n ot kowtow to industry. Please monitor any industry that emits more than a half to n of lead into the air per year. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6297
Name: S. Chatman Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). The Center for Disease Control says, "Approximately 250 ,000 U.S. children aged 1-5 years have blood lead levels greater than 10 mi crograms of lead per deciliter of blood, the level at which CDC recommen ds public health actions be initiated. Lead poisoning can affect nearly every s ystem in the body. Because lead poisoning often occurs with no obvious symptom s, it frequently goes unrecognized." There is no reason not track the rel ease of a significant amount of this toxic substance. Please help keep Americans safe. Thank you. Response: Responded to in preamble.184 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6296

Name: E. Carter Organization: Comment: PLEASE do the right thing ! I strongly urg e the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits mo re than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6295
Name: M. Hillman Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. As a mother of 4 chil dren, I would strongly advocate the overturning of this irresponsible Bush -era relaxation of EPA rules. Let this issue be revisited and corrected. Most of Bush's policies are injurious to citizens for the sake of corporate profit, so we ne ed to reverse this egregious trend until they're all undone!!! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6306 Name: M. Sawaya Organization: Comment: I am writing to strongly urge the EPA to e nact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than hal f a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our childre n who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. We should always prioritize the interests of human beings over the interests of cor porations that pollute the environment. And the health of children is especial ly important because they are the future. Please ensure that the air is as cl ean as possible and that we (and185 especially children) are not being sickened by air pollution. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6327

Name: C. Ransom Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollutant will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. We don't let our chil dren eat lead paint anymore; why would we let them BREATH lead? Get tough on led fumes, please. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6337 Name: P. Berg Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Our heath is so impor tant and we trust the EPA to keep pollution to an absolute minimum. Please prote ct us! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6336

Name: L. Green Organization: Comment: Please urge the EPA to monitor lead in the air. Rules must be enacted to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). This is strongly need to protect our children from lead exposure.186 Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6335

Name: B. Bennett Organization: Comment: I do everything I can to keep toxic substa nces out of my family's diet, but I need the government's help where the ai r is concerned. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Mon itoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6334
Name: M. Johnson Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Please thoughtfully c onsider future generations. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6333

Name: J. Jones Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. HALF THE MEN IN THE T OWN WHERE I GREW UP GOT LEAD POISONING FROM AN UNREGULATED STEE L MILL.187 Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6332
Name: A. Gilbert Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Lead is a known toxin , and efforts to date have made a significant difference: Let's be sure to con tinue to bring levels down! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6331 Name: K. A. Kwayana Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Without strong and ef fective regulation, there will continue to be massive amounts of disease. Please d o not hesitate to regulate these lead plants. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6330

Name: H. Gartsman Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. EVERYTHING AND ANYTHI NG IS188 IMPORTANT TO THE HEALTH & SAFETY FOR ALL OF US. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6315 Name: A. Doherty Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Please do this not ju st for our health and well-being but for that of future generations. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6328
Name: G. Oakes Organization: Comment: The EPA has a responsibility to protect th e environment and the public good, not corporate interests. Therefore, I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require the most stringent monitoring stan dards of airborne lead possible. Monitoring this dangerous source of pollu tion will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our chi ldren who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: No response needed.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6292 Name: M. Carey Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). The Romans used lead water pipes because they didn't kn ow better. WE DO! Please don't let the toxic effects of airborne lead compro mise the opportunity for our kids to reach the full potential of their talent an d drive. We can't afford to lose189 any of their contributions in this global economy. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6326

Name: P. Netzer Organization: Comment: Why would the EPA not be eager to enact la ws requiring monitoring at any facility that emits anything more than a sma ll amount of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Why would they not want to improve the health and well being of our nation and world? especially our children wh o are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6325
Name: P. Shannon Organization: Comment: It is imperative that we take strong actio n and stop the poisoning of our country. When allot of people finally recognize d the terrible damage it will be to late to do anything about it. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6324
Name: S. Scherk Organization: Comment: The Bush administration had its priorities backward and promoted industry over the environment and public health. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility t hat emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring thi s dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children190 who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6323 Name: Dr. P. Sabey Organization: Comment: No government action should ever be taken without asking, IS THIS GOOD FOR THE CHILDREN? I strongly urge the EPA to e nact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. PUTTING BIUSINESS OR ECONOMIC INTERESTS AHEAD OF CHILD HEAL TH IS TANTAMOUNT TO CO Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6322

Name: P. Crown Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. The health and safety of all should have priority over the profits of polluters. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6321

Name: P. Green Organization: Comment: It is not your job to protect industrial p rofits! It is your job to protect the public's health! This is the reason for your ve ry existence. Our health is your bottom line! Corporate profits earned through the s laughter of Americans, the191 poisoning of our children - do you really support t his? Toxic lead does not belong in our air, as your own scientists concluded ! You must protect us from this deadly contaminant! Response: No response needed.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6320

Name: C. Pacosz Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. I also suffer from a condition brought on by heavy metals in the water and air - Chronic Fatigue Syndr ome and fibromyalgia - and have a very personal stake in limiting such polluta nts in the environment. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6318
Name: N. York Organization: Comment: Keep toxic lead out of our air. Strengthen monitoring. The health impacts are well known. Please step up these regula tions. Response: No response needed.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6329
Name: P. Glick Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. As you know, the buil dup of lead in the environment is deadly, literally.192 Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6259

Name: P. Estes Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. I was diagnosed with Multiple Sclerosis several years ago. Why I have it, I don't know. "Experts" c laim it to be either environmentally or virally induced to those who are predisposed to the cause of the affliction. Whatever..... If we don't set and m onitor reasonable standards to protect our environment/ourselves from toxic pollut ion, we may lead ourselves to self destruction. It's on your watch to prevent such things. It's your job! If you can't handle the task, there are plenty of people o ut there that need a job and would gladly take yours away. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6269
Name: C. von Hendricks Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Please do not continu e to roll over for corporate interests. The environment belongs to everyone. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6268
Name: S. Orrock Organization:193 Comment: For once, do your job -- enact rules to re quire monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Put the shame of your work under the Bush administration behind you, do what's best for the p lanet and all living creatures on it. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6267 Name: B. Sweeney Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Not addressing this p roblem is just a way of postponing the day when someone has to address it. How many people will be endangered by this lack of courage? President Obama was elected by people who wanted a change in how this country is governed . Keep toxic lead out of our air. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6266 Name: J. Cooper Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. This matter seems so logical to me. We all breathe air. So it is logical that we would all want to bre athe clean and healthy air. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6265194 Name: F. Rhodes Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Let us create the mos t pollution free environment we can for the best quality of life for all citizen s. Lead is one of the toxins that has long been known to impair health. Please monito r our public safety. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6264
Name: D. H. Fabian Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Our legislators have become so single-mindedly obsessed with tobacco (and tobacco taxes!) that these far more critical breath ing-related issues have remained neglected. The real dangers the great majo rity of us face are the result of lax monitoring and enforcement of anti-pollution laws. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6263
Name: E. Miller Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. As many of you know t he number of cases of asthma in children has increased in the last few ye ars. Perhaps by limiting the amount of toxic lead in the air, you can help to co ntrol the spread of this disease. Response: Responded to in preamble.195 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6262 Name: S. Guariglia Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. We need to do the bes t we can to keep toxins out of our environment! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6294
Name: S. Monteiro Organization: Comment: This is my public comment on rules to prot ect the American public from lead poisoning, particularly air born lead. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that em its more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this d angerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6260
Name: P. Newcomb Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Allot of good industr y will do us if we are all sick. I live in rural Vermont and some days I cough becau se of smog in the air. Response: Responded to in preamble.196 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6273 Name: M. Reddigari Organization: Comment: The EPA should put political biases aside and remember that its first responsibility is to maintain the health and welfar e of our communities by protecting the environments in which we all live. R e-enacting strict rules to require monitoring at facilities emitting airborne lead will help ensure that none are exposed to lead toxicity. This is a real threat that the EPA should know more about than any other governing body. If the EPA is not committed to the environment, who will be? The EPA must lead by exam ple here. Response: No response needed.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6258 Name: C. Pinckney Organization: Comment: I am in favor of the EPA enacting rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring and enforcing limits on this pollution s hould be an obvious job for the EPA. Limiting airborne lead emissions will help safeguard the health of our citizens, especially our children, who are most vul nerable. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6257
Name: B. Rierson Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. This is a no brainer. Do the job you are appointed to do--protect the citizens. Obama has a mandate to change the way our government did business. DO IT! Response: Responded to in preamble.197 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6256
Name: J. Austin Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Save our Health, plea se. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6255

Name: N. Pate Organization: Comment: Nothing is more important than our health. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facilit y that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6254
Name: J. Ould Organization: Comment: It's the EPA's job to protect us the citiz ens. We know that self monitoring by corporations doesn't work. The EPA ne eds to take on the role of monitoring and protecting. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than hal f a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our childre n who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6253198 Name: D. Schoech Organization: Comment: Our air in Dallas Fort Worth is bad, espec ially in the summer when kids and adults can work and play outside. I strong ly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that em its more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this d angerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6252
Name: D. Bell Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Should we even have t o ask ? Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6251
Name: A. Swank Organization: Comment: It's shameful that our government would co nsider continuing to allow companies to poison our air. Haven't you hear d? Our snow is toxic. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require mon itoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per yea r (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and wel l being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulner able to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6261199 Name: E. Herrera Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Please reduce the lev els. My children so ill due to Houston’s polluted air. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6282 Name: P. Lloyd Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. As someone with asthm a, and the parent of children with asthma, I believe clean air is of vit al importance to our future. Plus, I also recognize that particulates such as le ad emitted into the air will contaminate the entire area and can lead to far mor e serious problems, such as birth defects and the reduction of children's intel ligence. Please, don't let this happen to our children. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6310 Name: M. Rigby Organization: Comment: As a teacher of students with learning dis abilities, I have a personal concern with the amount of lead that is being inhal ed by children. Of course children are much more vulnerable to the effects of lead poisoning than adults. The effect on the nervous system of toxic lead leve ls is profound and very difficult to reverse, especially in children who ar e still developing brain tissue. Please do whatever it takes to put a reliable, enfo rceable method of monitoring and controlling the amount of toxic lead that is du mped into the environment. Whatever is being produced by pumping lead into the breathable environment200 simply cannot be worth the brain of even one of our children. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6291
Name: M. Lewis Organization: Comment: I write to strongly urge the EPA to enact rules that require monitoring at any facility that emits more than hal f a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). The health of U.S. children and adu lts far outweighs the interests of corporations. Monitoring this dangerous pollutio n will improve the health and well being of our community. It is up to you to protect us! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6290 Name: Comment submitted by C. Baldwin Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Please enact a commis sion to monitor the lead pollution. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6289 Name: M. Quintana Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. We must do what we ca n to keep our generations of today and not only humans but everything living on earth as healthy and safe as201 possible. To let your guards down because of the Bu sh administration is already a joke but to actually agree and think this action is okay is absurd. I really wish and hope you reconsider this. one love. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6288
Name: P. McAloon Organization: Comment: We have spent far too many years ignoring the health effects of the pro-business decisions made during the Bush Adminis tration!! I look into the faces of children every day and wonder what health problems they will encounter in the next 20-40-60 years as a result of our poor decisions. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring a t any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy) . Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6287 Name: M. Long Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. If we wish to cut the costs of health care we need to work towards having healthier citizens and having t hem not breathing in lead is a good step. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6286 Name: P. Ryan Organization:202 Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. C'mon guys, you are s upposed to be on the peoples side! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6285
Name: M. B. Mueller Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Please ensure that ou r air quality improves and is free from dangerous levels of lead. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6270
Name: K. Walters Organization: Comment: I ***STRONGLY*** urge the EPA to enact rul es to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than hal f a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our childre n who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. PLE ASE KEEP THE LEAD OUT OF OUR AIR!!! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6283 Name: M. Garrigues-Cortely Organization:203 Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Lead has long been kn own to be a toxin, and we need to have information in order to be able to pro tect public health. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6272
Name: B. Bell Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Heavy metals such as lead and mercury are poison and cause irreparable damage to the nervous system. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6281
Name: P. Piedrahita Organization: Comment: As our world continues to support ever inc reasing human population numbers the strain on our resources will continue. This does not mean that we should sacrifice the quality of our lives by succum bing to ideas of inevitable contamination of our environment. We can in fact co ntinue to grow sustainably without giving up such essential resources as clean healthy air. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Mon itoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6280204 Name: S. Dixon Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Even a half ton of ai rborne lead is detrimental to your and my health. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6279
Name: S. McAninch Organization: Comment: You need an EPA that stands up for clean a ir!!! Even your top execs and their grand children will choke to death if we keep on polluting the way we are. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to requ ire monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead pe r year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health an d well being of our community, especially our children who are particul arly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6278 Name: N. Egen Organization:
Comment: No lead should ever be released into the a tmosphere. Credo is suggesting that the EPA should be monitoring any fa cility that releases more than 0.5 tpy, that is 1000 lbs of airborne lead per year. This is ridiculous. You know, all a company has to do is to register with 1 0 names and then they can release 5 tons per year with impunity. Any company that is known to release lead as a byproduct of production should be monitor ed and a lead limit of 1 lb per year should be the maximum before the facility is closed down until they which time it can sequester all its lead emissions. We are far more important than battery companies, coal fired power plants and the like. Response: Responded to in preamble.205 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6277
Name: N. Morell Organization: Comment: Lead in the air? Are you kidding me? What Bush has done to this country must be undone as soon as possible. I stron gly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that em its more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this d angerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6276

Name: N. Zorn Organization: Comment: Can there be a goal more important to the protection of our environment than the health of our children? Please reenact strong rules to monitor our factories and smelting plants for lead containing emissions. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require mon itoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per yea r (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and wel l being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulner able to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6275
Name: M. Warfel Organization: Comment: Proceed with enhanced monitoring of Lead e missions. We need to know what is being released so that we can apply ap propriate controls. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6274206 Name: M. Swire Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6293
Name: M. M. Mueller Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution allows for bett er regulation of this toxin and faster reaction times if the lead levels releas ed exceed the set limits. As a result, we can use the information gathered from th e monitoring to improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6284
Name: M. Mathews Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Coal-fired energy pla nts are dousing residents in

ma Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6363207 Name: T. Dimas Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. By the way, I don't b uy the GOP party line that increased regulations send jobs over seas...we deci mated the working class in this country, sending mass numbers jobs overseas du ring Deregulation eras of Reagan, and both Bush Administrations. We the peopl e need protection from corporations who will ONLY do the right thing if fo rced to do so by regulations with teeth AND adequate enforcement to back it up. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6397
Name: J. Martin Organization: Comment: The EPA is entrusted to keep our air clean and should be held to that responsibility. Please do your job. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6369
Name: C. Geist Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Actually that amount is outrageous. To emit any lead into the air is dead wrong. Response: Responded to in preamble.208 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6368
Name: D. Hiltz Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. what happens if we ig nore this problem, do we really want to pass this to our kids and their kids Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6367 Name: B. Cunningham Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits airborne lead. The science is i n, and has been for years! Lead kills, lead mentally devastates children. It is tim e to stop this nonsense and stop destroying the only world we've got. Monitoring thi s dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Monitoring at all sources of Pb is both i mpractical (there are well over 100,000 facilities that emit some amount of Pb ) and unjustifiable. Very small sources of Pb have no potential to exceed the Pb NAAQS which was established at a level that protects public health with a margin of safety. The emission threshold finalized in this rule is intend ed to identify sources of Pb that have the potential to exceed the Pb NAAQS.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6366 Name: T. Homburg Organization: Comment: *Thank you for protecting our health by st rengthening rules to limit lead emissions to .50 tons per year for any one ind ustrial source. Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health an d well being of our community, especially our children who are particul arly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Keep up the good work!209 Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6358 Name: S. Brownrigg Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. STOP DAMAGING OUR PEO PLE AND OUR PLANET. WE ALL LIVE HERE!! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6364
Name: A. Bila Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. It's time we used som e money for our health. Get rid of mercury now. Thank you. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6308
Name: A. Mizicko Organization: Comment: Geez. Are we still dealing with lead pollu tion?! Let's please keep our children safe even if it nibbles at the profits of corporate polluters. Keep standards for airborne lead pollution strict, pleas e. Response: No response needed.210 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6362
Name: S. Kirschner Organization: Comment: I write to support enactment of rules to r equire monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year. It is known that monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our citizens, especially children, who are particul arly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Time to once again assume l eadership in PROTECTING our citizens and our environment, thus l iving up to your name and mandate. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6361

Name: S. Bonner Organization: Comment: I'm writing to ask that the EPA require th e monitoring of any factory that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead pe r year. Please don't let these corporations gamble with our health. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6398
Name: J. Dobkin Organization: Comment: I am shocked by the levels of lead still p resent in our air. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring a t any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy) . Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6360
Name: S. Millet211 Organization: Comment: As a grandmother I strongly urge the EPA t o enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than hal f a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our childre n who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6359
Name: S. Fouche Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. The Bush administrati on would have gladly eliminated the EPA, but settled for weakening it. W e need to take back the original intent of the establishment of this agency

. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6379
Name: I. Hack Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Added comments... I h ave extraordinarily high levels of lead and mercury in my body. It's an issu e I've been addressing for many years. How can it be okay for companies to all ow dumping of toxic chemicals into our air and water? It's poisoning pe ople slowly and as they become more toxic--more chronic diseases continue t o grow. Would the owners of these big companies consider poisoning th eir children? The future of healthy children and adults depends on clean air. L ook at the outrageously large increase in cancers in the U.S. This is part of why people are dying. Please listen to us and change your business practices--fo r the sake of all people.212 Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6365
Name: P. Torek Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. I work in a the field of detection and monitoring of metals. The technology in this field is very powerf ul and is becoming dirt cheap. When industry complains about the "burden" t his imposes, don't take a ride in their Waaahmbulance. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6374
Name: R. Schulte Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Please, as a citizen I strongly urge you to follow the guidelines that the agency itself supported with it 's own analysis in 2008. Please, preserve the right of Americans to the just ice of clean air. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6378
Name: J. Blackwood Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy).213 Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. I'm a long-time resid ent of Missouri so I have heard much about the ill-effects of lead on the chi ldren of our state. It's bad enough we are still trying to clean up polluted sit es from mistakes made years ago in the tri-state mining area and SE Missouri. I t's even worse that we might contribute more to the problem with new, unregulate d sources of lead in the environment. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6377 Name: J. Domingue Organization: Comment: I support monitoring airborne lead sources of more than half a ton of lead per year. This had been the EPA's own recommen dation until the Bush Administration squashed it. I hope you will not all ow corporate greed to allow public health to suffer. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6380
Name: J. Goodwin Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Filtering this airborne poison will improve the hea lth and well being of our community, especially our children who are particul arly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6376
Name: J. Archuleta Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any214 facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6381 Name: C. Quinn Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. I am an endurance ath lete that is careful about where I train and race due to deteriorating air qua lity. The earth's atmosphere must be cleaner to support it's growing population. The EPA must take action and ensure our air quality does not become like Chi na's! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6382
Name: A. Brutsche Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. All life deserves to be able to breathe clean air. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6384
Name: M. Clark Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any215 facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Please consider the l ong term impacts our choices will have on our children and grandchildren. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6375
Name: J. Bevsek Organization: Comment: Please enact strong monitoring rules for f acilities that emit dangerous airborne lead, and protect our and our ch ildrens' health against this toxic waste. Thank you. Response: No response needed.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6383 Name: J. Hoegler Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. The American public d epends on your work to ensure air safety. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6395 Name: P. Wong Organization: Comment: Lead intake damages children's brains. Yet the EPA has rolled back monitoring rules. I strongly urge the EPA to correc t the odious mistake of the Bush administration by enacting rules to require mo nitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per yea r (.50 tpy). Monitoring this216 dangerous pollution will improve the health and wel l being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulner able to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6396
Name: J. Boudart Organization:
Comment: There is no known "least amount" of lead t hat is acceptable in human physiology. As soon as possible the acceptabl e amount should be brought down as low as possible. I strongly urge th e EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6373
Name: D. D. Booker Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. At the rate we are go ing, homo sapiens will no longer exist in their present form. We are on our w ay to being our own aliens. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6372

Name: D. McRae Organization: Comment: Because it especially endangers the health of children, I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring a t any facility that emits more217 than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy) . Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Please keep in mind that it is the measure of a soc iety's moral health how we treat our most vulnerable members. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6371
Name: D. Cheman Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. We have no greater bi rthright than clean air. No one or no entity should be allowed to destroy that right. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6357
Name: R. Tantala Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. As GRANDMOTHER I'm es pecially concerned about this issue and so is my mother--GREAT-GRANDMO THER of two--and my daughter. So please think about our kids when yo u enact these rules. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6339

Name: L. Bevan Organization:218 Comment: I have seen the effects of lead poisoning in Kellogg, Idaho and hope that nothing like it happens again. The children th ere had been poisoned and their IQs changed forever. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than hal f a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our childre n who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6345 Name: R. Luongo Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Surely this is one pr eventative health care measure we can take to save us millions in future health ca re bills. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6387 Name: J. Long Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. The raise in auto imm une diseases is increasing at a rapid rate because of this pollution and others. Il lness are developing every day because of our over industrialization and the lack of concern for the health of people. Please regulate today for the sake of our c ivilization and that of our environment. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6392219 Name: J. McElhatton Organization: Comment: As an RN I am acutely aware of the damagin g effects of lead on children. These effects are long term, affecting ch ildren, their families and their communities, and are both costly and heart wrenchin g. More importantly, they can be prevented by reducing exposure of children t o lead. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any fac ility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6349 Name: J. Murphy Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Even a thousand pound s in the air every year over the years sounds too dangerous to me. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6388
Name: J. Neidich Organization: Comment: I am a pediatrician and I know first hand the destruction that lead can cause in children. I strongly urge the EPA to e nact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than hal f a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our childre n who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Chi ldren with lead poisoning have diminished capacity to learn, hyperactivity, a nd possibly permanent developmental delays. We need to protect children f rom this devastating toxin. Response: Responded to in preamble.220 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6348
Name: J. Ascher Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Lead is a very dangerous substance. Only close monitorin g of its use and rapid responses to abuses in its mining, transport, and m anufacturing processes are required to keep the general public safe. Monitorin g this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our commu nity, especially our children who are particularly vulnerable to the ris ks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6347

Name: D. I. Fearn Organization: Comment: I have a direct personal interest in pollu tion free air. I suffer from asthma and allergies. I strongly urge the EPA to en act rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than hal f a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our childre n who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6370
Name: D. Seals Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. We thank you for your time in re-considering such a measure which has such an impact on us all. Response: Responded to in preamble.221 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6346 Name: D. Pray Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. It's simple, do you w ant to save babies lives by limiting toxic pollution? Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6393
Name: K. Whitcomb Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Clean air is a basic human right. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6344
Name: N. Nathan Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. WHY ARE WE HAVING TO TELL YOU THIS? ISN'T THIS YOUR DUTY/JOB? Response: Responded to in preamble.222 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6343
Name: S. Alex Organization: Comment: Will you please enact rules to require mon itoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per yea r (.50 tpy)? Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and wel l being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulner able to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6342 Name: M. Maloney Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Isn't the current lev el of autoimmune diseases in our culture cause for alarm? How can you possibly j ustify allowing more poison into our environment? Be the change we need, NOW! Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6391
Name: H. Boschen Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. The reason we stopped using lead shot in the shotgun was because it poisoned birds. Can we not d o the same for children? Response: Responded to in preamble.223 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6390
Name: J. LaClaire Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. If EPA does not act o n this, who will? You must be the watchdogs for the safety of our health. The hor rific results of lead mining in Missouri and Oklahoma have left piles of waste that have been used in playgrounds, roads, other construction. This MUST n ot happen again. Please act courageously. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6340

Name: H. James Organization: Comment: It's a no brainer, lead poisoning of child ren means non-viable adults. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require m onitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per yea r (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and wel l being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulner able to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6389
Name: J. Landon Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Whereas I want to sup port industry, the whole picture must be considered, including the quality o f life and health of the citizenry. Please protect the public.224 Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6402
Name: R. Cerello Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. There can be no doubt ing the necessity of this action after too-long a wait, denial, lying and wor se, no debate on this data, and no hesitating. Unless such obvious and desperately- needed legislation is swiftly enacted, its political points for you its sponsors and the benefits it could provide and would provide for citizens will both be comprom ised. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6403
Name: D. McDowell Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Don't sell the future for a little gain now. Protect our environment! Smart, Sustainable growth is what we need even if it means some sacrifices. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6356
Name: R. Ovenshire Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy).225 Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. What industry saves b y polluting the air, costs the people who have to breathe it in poor health and de ath. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6386

Name: J. Ott Organization: Comment: Though the following is a form letter, I f irmly stand behind all the sentiments expressed: I strongly urge the EPA to en act rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than hal f a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our childre n who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6385
Name: J. Kind Organization: Comment: It is jaw-dropping, gut-wrenching to witne ss the dilution of clean air standards that has taken place over the last few ye ars! The health implications of air pollution are so well documented that it is unconscionable to do anything less than strengthen the EPA's ability to monitor t he industries responsible for violating air quality standards that threaten publi c health. It is contrary to the very existence of the EPA. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than hal f a ton of airborne lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and well being of our community, especially our childre n who are particularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6352
Name: L. St. John226 Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. After decades of scie nce why must the government continue to be told that poisons are poisonous? Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6399

Name: J. Kuntz Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. And guess what...in t he long run it will save us money. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6353
Name: R. Snook Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. We depend on you to p rotect our children from this hazard. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6351 Name: J. Dryer227 Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. The ability to monito r the levels of all heavy metals, especially lead into the air and water, sho uld be required by the EPA, so that citizens may know whether an area near such fa cilities remain habitable. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6400 Name: J. Kenney Organization: Comment: I urge the EPA to enact rules to require m onitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead pe r year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health an d well being of our community, especially our children who are particul arly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Our country must lead the w ay in correcting environmental hazards. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6350 Name: J. and C. DeMayo Organization: Comment: Everyone knows that the science tells us t hat lead is lethal to public health. You must control the airborne lead that end s up in the air we breathe. I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require mon itoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborne lead per yea r (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve the health and wel l being of our community, especially our children who are particularly vulner able to the risks posed by lead toxicity. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6354228 Name: R. Curry Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. It is important that we not allow pollution to cause potential health risks especially since we are like ly headed for nationalized health care. The costs, both to productivity and ot herwise could be devastating. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6355

Name: M. Moran Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. This action will save lives. Thank you for your immediate attention to this important matter. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6401
Name: J. G. Gilmore Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. As a grandparent whos e grandchild suffered from exposure to lead poisoning, I strongly urge you to consider the future of our grandchildren and great grandchildren, no amount of money can replace our youth. Stop poisoning our children!! Response: Responded to in preamble.229 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6394
Name: K. Noble Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to enact rules to require monitoring at any facility that emits more than half a ton of airborn e lead per year (.50 tpy). Monitoring this dangerous pollution will improve th e health and well being of our community, especially our children who are part icularly vulnerable to the risks posed by lead toxicity. There is nothing more important to give our children and grandchildren than clean air and water ! Don't leave them this mess to clean up too! Response: Responded to in preamble.230



## Comments on Monitoring at Airports

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5957
Name: Chris Kunze Organization: The City of Long Beach Airport Depart ment Comment: As an example of the need for more accurat e data to determine a need for monitoring, although the Long Beach Airpor t (LGB) is listed as #6 on your list of airports proposed for specific Pb moni toring, the underlying airport operations data was based on the year 2002. Since 2 002, general aviation operations activity at LGB has DECREASED by 20%, no t at all reflected in EPA's estimates. Since 2002, AVGas (fuel used by GA prop aircraft) fuel sales has DECREASED by 49%. Current data should be availa ble from all of the airports subject to potential monitoring under the EPA NPRM, which would allow for a much more accurate assessment of need. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5948
Name: Ted Steichen Organization: American Petroleum Institute (API) Comment: Given the limited data on airport lead emi ssions used by EPA in developing the NAAQS and this NPRM, we recommend a careful review of the data, assumptions and methodology EPA used to estim ate airport lead inventories. Specific recommendations include: · EPA should review and compare its estimation proc ess against the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Emissions and Dispers ion Modeling System (EDMS). · Operations data used to allocate lead to airports were estimated from the FAA’s Terminal Area Forecast (TAF) system for the y ear 2002. EPA/FAA should verify the accuracy of those estimates again st actual 2002 activity. · EPA should improve/verify turboprop vs. nonturbop rop aircraft data at airports. · EPA should verify values used for concentration o f lead in fuel and retention of lead in engine and oil. · EPA should verify the categorization of local are a or itinerant operation and the role it has in emission estimates inside/outsid e the landing and takeoff (LTO) cycle. · EPA indicates that it does not have LTO cycle dat a for 14,000+ airports and231 the Technical Support Document2 (TSD) says EPA shou ld collect and analyze this information. EPA should move forward on its ow n recommendation in the TSD and develop and verify methods to estimate LTO activity at these small facilities. Response: EPA has responded to these suggestions. Our latest analysis and information is presented in the memo to the Pb NAAQ S docket titled 'Selection of Airports for the Airport Monitoring Study' and i s further described in the document 'Calculating Piston-Engine Aircraft Airpor t Inventories for Lead and Other Criteria Pollutants for the 2008 National Emi ssions Inventory' available at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/net/2008inventory. html. Additional information is being collected by EPA and when avai lable will be posted at: www.epa.gov/otaq/aviation.htm.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5951 Name: G. Vinson Hellwig Organization: The Michigan Department of Natural Re sources and Environment (MDNRE) Comment: 3. Nationwide lead monitoring at airports is not justified at this time. The only empirical evidence offered by the EPA to d emonstrate the need for lead monitoring at airports is the 0.1 pg/m3 three- month concentration recorded at an airport in Santa Monica, California. The MDNR E wishes to point out that a 0.1 pg/ma concentration is below the lead NAAQS o f 0.15 ug/m3. Given that emissions at airports are spread over a very large area, applying a ratio to Santa Monica’s emissions and observed concentrations to d evelop an emission threshold for lead monitoring at airports across th e nation is hardly persuasive. Due to the paucity of lead monitoring data at airpo rts, the lack of appropriate data such as runway usage by plane type and terrain characteristics, as well as the logistical constraints caused by airports groun ds having limited access, pilot projects should be carried out by the EPA at a hand ful of airports having the highest lead emissions before nationwide monitoring is required. This approach will allow the EPA to better characterize the probl em while minimizing costs. Even if such a pilot study approach to lead monitor ing is adopted, the EPA needs to develop specific siting requirements. Cons iderations should include: 1) whether the required number of monitors per airp ort is based upon emissions, the number of runways, the airport’s tot al acreage or upon some other metric; 2) whether meteorological data collec ted at airports by the National Weather Service will be adequate despite d ifferent thresholds and integration times; and 3) what constitutes ambient air. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5951232 Name: Avinash Kar Organization: Natural Resources Defense Council (NR DC) et al. Comment: The available evidence also supports the r etention of the same monitoring threshold for airports which emit more t han 0.5 tons per year of lead. Due to the continued use of leaded aviation g as, USEPA estimated that over 600 tons of lead were released from piston-eng ine powered aircraft in 2002.5 Because piston-engine powered aircraft conti nue to be a significant presence at general aviation airports, these airpor ts continue to be a source of lead emissions with the potential to result in lead concentrations in exceedence of the NAAQS. Although lead emissions from aircraft can be dispersed widely, evidence from studies suggests that the landing and take-off activities at general aviation airports increases pollutant levels in adj acent communities. In particular, spikes in particulate matter concentrat ions, which can carry the lead contamination, were associated with aircraft activi ty at a general aviation airport in Southern California. 6 In addition, due to their reduced size, general aviation airports are frequently in closer proximit y to neighboring communities than larger airports, thereby exposing populations to potentially unsafe pollutant levels.7 All five of the studies EPA revi ewed where lead was monitored downwind from airports found elevated lea d concentrations and, where the monitoring was consistent with the NAAQS, the concentrations were significant.8 The latest and best available data on downwind pollution from these airports thus supports the decision to consid er them point sources analogous to industrial facilities with the potenti al to cause downwind lead concentrations exceeding the NAAQS. As the EPA poin ts out, there is no evidence to support a departure from the monitoring threshold for industrial sources. Therefore, EPA is justified in requiring m onitors downwind of airports with estimated emissions exceeding 0.5 tons of lead per year. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5953 Name: Sandra F. Veazey Organization: Florida Department of Environmental P rotection Comment: Lead at airports is emitted by piston engi ne aircraft using leaded gasoline. Monitoring at airports will provide data for EPA but will not result in state actions to eliminate the source of the lead. lf the lead NAAQS is violated at airports a federal response will be required to change the lead content in the aviation fuel. Since the appropriate response to an y violations would be a federally controlled change. monitoring at most air ports will not serve to protect public health. Rather than requiring monito ring at many airports in each state. the division encourages EPA to develop its d ata by performing monitoring at a small number of airports throughout the country.233 Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5955 Name: Leslie Riegle Organization: American Association of Airport Execu tives (AAAE) Comment: Monitor Placement We would not discourage the EPA from its responsibility to monitor ambient air quality of th e public. With that said, we would like to make certain that this testing is acc urate; measuring only ambient air, as defined in 40 CFR Part 50.1 as “that portio n of the atmosphere, external to buildings, to which the general public has acces s”. Placement of the monitors is perhaps the most critical element for an accurat e assessment. Monitors placed directly at the end or sides of a runway where airc raft are taking off would not be indicative of “ambient air” in most, if not all, general aviation airports. There are many factors at each airport which could affect the accuracy of monitoring: wind speed, wind direction, relative humidity, ambi ent temperature and other meteorological effects, ‘‘urban background lead’’, and of course proximity to the general public, as previously mentioned. We wou ld like assurance that local authorities are instructed by the EPA to work with airports to make certain all of these factors are taken into consideration. Response: The EPA has and will continue to work wit h monitoring agencies to help them identify proper locations. Due to the pot ential for additional complexity in siting monitors at airports, the EPA expects to work particularly close with monitoring agencies in ensuring proper s iting of monitors at airports.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5955 Name: Leslie Riegle Organization: American Association of Airport Execu tives (AAAE) Comment: AAAE members would like to provide the EPA with as many current, valid data points as possible, but are una ble to do so extensively, given the time constraint of the comment period. Despite this minimal time allotment, we hope to provide you with some useful clarificati on. We agree with EPA’s assessment, that data given by the state and local authorities should use more recent statistics than 2002. Many events including significant fuel price increases, and aircraft utilization decreases, have occurred since this time period. However, instead of the recommended three y ear period advised in EPA’s Technical Support Document (TSD) on page 6, w e would recommend at least a five year average in order to derive any si gnificant statistical data. Piston vs. Turbine GA Aircraft Activity The breakdown of p iston vs. turbine aircraft is essential to generate meaningful statistics for EPA ’s projected lead emissions234 amount. Given the information provided to AAAE from our membership we estimate that 56% of all aircraft at general aviati on facilities operate piston engine aircraft. The EPA on page 4 of the TSD, has used the 2005 GAATA Survey to estimate this amount, and has deduced tha t approximately 72% of all GA and Air Taxi Landing and Take-Off activities are from piston-engine aircraft which use avgas, and about 28% are turbopr op and turbojet powered which use jet fuel. As you can see from our reporte d average number, this would appear to be an overstatement, perhaps due to increased piston aircraft activity in that particular year; thus, the need to take several years into account when deriving these averages. Avgas Usage/Sales Avg as usage (as determined in this case by sales) is also an essential data po int. We would again state that using information from one particular year, in this case 2002, does not produce an accurate assessment. Usage/sales figures should have been averaged over several years, as demand can increase and decrease greatly from year to year. In fact, according to reports from our membership, avg as sales have dropped dramatically in the last few years. In one particul ar case, while avgas was 57% of the total fuel sold in 2002, this number was onl y 41% in 2008, indicating that the use of avgas has started to make up less of tot al fuel sold at that GA facility. Another airport reported that in 2002, the year tha t the EPA uses as its base for many of the calculations, avgas fuel sales were aro und 526,899 gallons. In year 2009, it sold only 254,357 gallons. Meaning less th an half the amount of avgas was sold last year than in 2002. On average, howeve r, we found our airport members’ sales had dropped 35% since 2002. The EPA should recognize that avgas fuel sales have been dramatically declining s ince their studies were conducted. Aircraft Movements Similar to that of av gas figures, which should not be taken exclusively from one year, aircraft la nding and take-off (LTO) activity data, referenced on Page 3 in the TSD, and derived from FAA’s Terminal Area Forecast (TAF) system, was also only sampled from the year 2002. Though interlinked with avgas usage, merely t aking one snapshot of the industry could lead to overestimation especially du ring such economic volatility. Much is the same for aircraft utilizati on as avgas figures; the demand has dropped significantly in the last few years, ma king this data point irrelevant. Landing and Take-Off (LTO) Cycle We are hopeful that local authorities or individual airports are able to prov ide the EPA with more accurate figures regarding taxi/idle-out, takeoff, climb-out, approach, and taxi/idle-in times. Also, we agree that this inform ation varies greatly at each airport, and should be documented and taken into co nsideration by the EPA when monitoring is conducted. The membership believ es that the 16 minute taxi-in/taxi-out time which was cited in EPA’s TSD on page 4, in accordance with EPA’s Procedures for Emission Inventory Prepar ation, Volume IV: Mobile Sources, 1992 is overestimated. AAAE members hip stated that their figures would be approximately half of this (8 minu tes). Response: EPA has elected to maintain airport lead inventories relevant to individual years of activity so that sources can be compared across categories within the National Emissions Inventory. In respon se to comments we are using a more recent year of activity data (e.g., 20 08) in this final action which235 reflects the decrease in activity of the general av iation fleet observed since 2002. In evaluating the fraction of piston-engine activity at airports that may be subject to lead monitoring requirements EPA has acquired airport-specific information as described in the memo to the Pb NAAQ S docket titled 'Selection of Airports for the Airport Monitoring Study.' Ind ividual airport reporting time-in-mode data for piston-engine aircraft agree well with the national defaults we are using. EPA is continuing to accept additional airport-specific information. The methods we are using as well as c ontacts for additional questions and information are provided in the docum ent titled 'Calculating Piston-Engine Aircraft Airport Inventories for Lead and Other Criteria Pollutants for the 2008 National Emissions Inventor y' available at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/net/2008inventory.html

.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5955 Name: Leslie Riegle Organization: American Association of Airport Execu tives (AAAE) Comment: The concern about the Santa Monica study i s that it is just that; merely one study. Again, airports are greatly varie d entities, and this limited study should not be generalized to the entire popul ation of GA airports. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5946
Name: Arthur N. Marin Organization: Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM) Comment: NESCAUM agrees with the EPA proposal to ch ange the lead emission threshold at which agencies are required t o conduct lead monitoring for National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) p urposes near a source from 1.0 to 0.50 tons per year (tpy) (74 FR 69051). However, NESCAUM believes that this threshold, while appropriate for traditional lead sources as noted at 74 FR 69052 (e.g., lead smelters, metallur gical operations, battery manufacturing), is not appropriate for NAAQS monito ring purposes at general aviation airports. The airport study cited by EPA i n the Federal Register (74 FR 69054) does not support the need for lowering the m onitoring threshold for general aviation airports. That study indicates tha t neither the Santa Monica nor the Van Nuys airports showed lead concentrations hi gher than the Los Angeles basin average of 0.018 μg/m3 at sites beyond the ai rport property. We strongly recommend that the monitoring threshold for general aviation airport lead monitoring remain at 1.0 tpy. Based on the draft 20 08 National Emissions236 Inventory,1 this threshold would require monitoring at the eight largest general aviation airports (i.e., in California, Florida, Co lorado, New York, Oklahoma, and Arizona). Based on these data, EPA can reassess the need for additional lead monitoring at smaller general aviation airport s in a future rulemaking. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5957
Name: Chris Kunze Organization: The City of Long Beach Airport Depart ment Comment: We support EPA's efforts to reasonably dea l with lead (Pb) emissions, including those attributed to general av iation piston aircraft. We also feel that the effort should be based on accurate in formation and assumptions, and that the efforts should be responsible in terms of health impact assessment and economic realities. Upon reading the EPA's Noti ce of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) and its Technical Support Documen t, it appears as though a different approach based on current inform ation and state-of-the-art emission generation/dispersion modeling would provi de accurate information, without the need to implement costly and time consu ming Pb air quality monitoring at 55 listed airports. This is especiall y true given the fact that lead emissions attributed to general aviation (GA) activ ity appears to be on the long term decline, and that aircraft manufacturers and o ther involved user groups appear to be willing to work with EPA and other fed eral agencies toward reasonable solutions. This different approach would involve the EPA continuing to identify lead emissions through state -of-the-art modeling, current operations data from high activity airports, and co llection of other site specific readily available information which would add to th e accuracy of area-specific emission estimates. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6064 Name: Myra C. Reece Organization: South Carolina Department of Health a nd Environmental Control Comment: The department strongly questions EPA's co nclusion in section iv of the preamble and disagrees that lead emissions rela ted to the use of leaded aviation fuel during landing and takeoff (LTO) acti vity should be treated the same as an industrial lead source. The nature of th e emissions - sporadic, at different rates, locations and altitudes, with mixi ng enhanced by the propulsion and movement of the individual sources and distribu ted over three dimensions237 in a relatively large volume - is unlike any other potential course. The calculation provided to support the contention, unl ike the universe of data mined for the estimate of facility impacts is based on one example which may or may not be representative of impacts related to general aviation activity. There is no evidence that an equivalent search of t he monitoring data available in EPA's AQS (or other sources) for lead monitors i n the vicinity of general aviation activity was conducted. It appears that EP A is requiring nation-wide ambient monitoring based on one very limited study at an airport in California rather than conducting intensive research utilizing the many opportunities that it has available to do this. The inclusion of gener al aviation facilities as sources that require monitoring or waivers incurs significa nt additional costs on stats and local air agencies for data collection and anal ysis, inventory improvement and quality assurance evaluation, modeling, monitor ing and reporting for not only the fifty-five airports identified, but for al l airports that may approach the threshold. The Department does not believe there is sufficient data available to justify the treatment of airports in the same manne r as industrial sources. One example (a single study in Santa Monica, CA airport citing concentrations at the runway blast fence) is insufficient. It is inap propriate to treat the limited available resources when there are a significant nu mber of identified and well characterized sources that more clearly need the ne w monitoring. Airports are different and those differences need to be better u nderstood before broad application of a threshold developed from industria l source/monitor pairs is applied. Furthermore, if violation were to occur, r esolving general aviation operation impacts on areas in close proximity to ai rports would require federally-driven changes, not the implementation of local controls. Minimizing meaningless SIP obligations will reduce unnecessary resource demands on our agencies and will allow the focus to be on emission s reductions that will allow areas to quickly achieve the Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5957
Name: Chris Kunze Organization: The City of Long Beach Airport Depart ment Comment: Airport "site specifics", rather than just "number of operations", are relevant to any emissions impact assessment. For LG B as an example, GA aircraft, depending on meteorological conditions an d airport business origin/destination location, have 10 runway directi on choices (either direction on 5 different runways). This reality creates a muc h different dispersion of any aircraft emission than that which would be the case at a single runway airport. For example, LGB's two most commonly used GA runway s are separated by nearly 3,000 feet, resulting in a much greater disp ersion of emissions, which can and should be reflected in impact modeling. As an example of site specific factors, the City of Long Beach certified an EIR/HH RA (Human Health Risk238 Assessment) in June of 2007, based on newer 2005 ba seline data and site geography than that currently used by EPA. We used EDMS modeling (used by EPA and FAA), which concluded that no areas around LGB showed Pb exposure in excess of NAAQs standards. This is cons istent with local SCAQMD-monitored air quality, including a monitor a pproximately 1 mile from the Airport, which showed NO exceedence of fed eral or State standards for Pb over a monitoring period of 1995 - 2004. The HHRA also determined that multiple pathway sources (such as soil) "are u nlikely to represent a significant human health risk". This was supplement ed by 2006 on-Airport soil studies which indicated that the lead content was b elow California Total Threshold Limit Concentrations and Soluble Threshol d Limit Concentrations, and below California Human Health Screening Levels for Residential Land Use. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5957
Name: Chris Kunze Organization: The City of Long Beach Airport Depart ment Comment: We agree with EPA's Technical Support Docu ment, which recommends more recent data, and use of multiple vs . single year data, due to industry/airport dynamics, and also agree with its suggestion that local authorities might be able to provide more accurate "times-in-mode". For example, the 16 minute taxi to/from time-in-mode us ed by EPA is likely twice the actual time in taxi mode at LGB, based on the m ultiple runways and location of origin/destination on-Airport locations . 4) Any advanced modeling to determine air quality impacts of GA should give consideration to dispersion and receptor locations. For example, airports have sensitive receptors at different locations - some close, some not. Runway length is also a factor, with longer runways allowing for higher approach/departu re altitudes over sensitive receptors than would short runways. Ambient wind sp eed/direction, humidity, and temperatures in some cases would be relevant to accurate, site specific modeling. Reference was made to EPA Pb monitoring a t Santa Monica Airport, however it is our understanding that the results sh owed no actionable levels outside of the Airport's boundaries, for this one r unway airport located adjacent to major freeways (which can also create background readings for many air quality constituents). 5) Other modeling updates fo r EPA's consideration would be assumptions regarding GA activity categorization , between piston and turbo-prop/turbo-jet aircraft. It is our understand ing that current usage is more dispersed towards turbo-prop/turbo-jet than the 72% piston engine allocation made in the EPA modeling. Again, more current data acquisition would provide more realistic modeling and impact assessment. Response: Responded to in preamble.239 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5957
Name: Chris Kunze Organization: The City of Long Beach Airport Depart ment Comment: Based on the above observations, we do not believe that a mandate to actually monitor Pb emissions at the 55 listed a irports is appropriate at this time, and that EPA use of current information and u pdated air quality modeling protocols would provide useable information for det ermining responsible policy and regulatory actions. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5963 Name: James L. Kavanaugh Organization: Missouri Department of Natural Resour ces (MODNR) Comment: Spirit of St. Louis Airport in Chesterfiel d, Missouri (near St. Louis) has been identified in EPA's analysis (U.S . Enviro nmental Protection Agency (2008), Lead Emissions from the Use of Leaded Aviat ion Gasoline in the United States, EPAa20-R-08-020) as the airport in M issouri with the highest estimated lead emissions, slightly less than 0.5 tp y. We have reviewed information on operations at this airport, includin g type of aircraft, fuel sales, and landing/takeoff (LTO) data and have found that the percentage of aircraft using leaded fuel is considerably lower than assume d in EPA's analysis where 72% of LTOs used LL100 fuel. The overall total fuel sales at the airport from 2002-06 illustrate a 5.6°lo maximum percentage of a viation gasoline (Avgas or LL100) sold. Along with the maximum landing and tak eoff data in the last six years for general aviation and air taxi (160,341 in 2004), estimated lead emissions from operations at this facility are 0~07 tpy. The calculation provided below is based on EPA's Lead Emissions fro m the Use of Leaded Aviation Gasoline in the United States: Technical S upport Document. 160,341 Total LTO * (0.056 Avgas LTO/ Total LT0) * 7.34 lb Pb / Avgas LTO '" (0.95 lb Pb emitted / lb Pb in Avgas) / (1000 g / kg) = 6 2.61 kg Pb/year = 0.07 Tons Pb/year This result suggests that lead monitoring a t airports in Missouri would produce extremely limited benefit when compared to other sources of lead in Missouri. Response: Monitoring agencies are encouraged to use the most recent and accurate estimates of Pb emissions when determining the applicability of these monitoring requirements.240 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6025 Name: Michael Villegas Organization: Ventura County Air Pollution Control District (VCAPCD) Comment: EPA's proposed revisions to appendix D to Part 58 do not provide for a similar mechanism to demonstrate that actual emissions from airports are less than 0.50 tpy. EPA should provide state and lo cal monitoring agencies with a mechanism similar to proposed paragraph 4.5(a) (i i), for such a demonstration. Response: Duplicate comment.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6025 Name: Michael Villegas Organization: Ventura County Air Pollution Control District (VCAPCD) Comment: EPA's proposed revisions to Appendix D to Part 58 do not provide a mechanism to demonstrate that actual emissions from airports are less than 0.50 tpy. EPA should provide state and local agencies wi th a mechanism similar to proposed paragraph 4.5(a) (ii), for such a demonstr ation. Response: The monitoring requirements do identify t hat the emission estimate should be based on "either the most recent National Emission Inventory ( http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/eiinformation.html ) o r other scientifically justifiable methods and data (such as improved emis sions factors or site-specific data)." EPA has worked with the monit oring agencies directly and through guidance to inform them that they do not ne ed to seek a waiver if they can demonstrate, to the Regional Administrators sat isfaction, that improved emission estimates indicate emissions are less than 0.50 tpy. In these cases, monitoring agencies need only document the improved emission estimates in their monitoring plans (which are subject to Region al Administrator approval).

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6025 Name: Michael Villegas Organization: Ventura County Air Pollution Control District (VCAPCD)
Comment: VCAPCD has reviewed the 2002 and 2005 NEI and found that it is not suitable to accurately determine lead emissions from airports in Ventura County. In our case, the NEI lead emissions from ai rports are on an aggregated county-wide basis. Aircraft activity at our largest airport (potentially subject to monitoring) has decreased steadily from 197,911 ope rations in 2002 to 153,233 operations in 2008. VCAPCD staff has calculated lea d emissions from piston241 driven aircraft from each of our airports; for 2008 we have determined that the lead emissions from Ventura County airports are sub stantially less that emissions in the NEI. Our calculations demonstrate that the one airport identified in EPA's technical support document - Ca marillo Airport - as emitting more than 0.5 tpy emits approximately 0.34 tpy, based upon 2008 aircraft activity . VCAPCD staff used FAA operation s data for Camarillo Airport, with airport-specific aircraft population based on the proportion of based aircraft from FAA form 5 010 -1 Airport Maste r Records to determine operations by general aircraft category (piston sin gle engine, piston twin engine, helicopter, turboprop and jet aircraft) . A ircraft operations were distributed to specific aircraft models based on in formation from the Ventura County deputy director of airports. Piston single e ngine operations are further distinguished between full Landing and Take-Off cyc les (LTOs) consisting of all five operational modes (75% of operations) and Touch and Go cycles (TGOs) without a taxi/idle mode associated with lan ding/takeoff practice at the flight schools (25% of operations), as suggested by a local airport association. Aircraft operations and airport-specific time-in-mo de operating profiles based on the local mixing height instead of the national default were used in FAA EDMS model version 5.1 to develop our own estimate of 2007 emissions and fuel consumption by aircraft operating mode. Aviati on gasoline consumption for piston aircraft was used to estimate lead (Pb) emissions. A similar process was used for 2008 using EDMS model version 5 .1 .2 . This methodology is consistent with EPA's recent guidance for calculati ng aircraft emissions . VCAPCD has recently provided data to EPA documentin g Ventura County's 2008 lead emissions from our local airports . Furth ermore, we understand that EPA is currently updating the emission inventory fo r aircraft emissions . Response: Monitoring agencies are encouraged to use the most accurate and current emissions estimates when determining the ap plicability of the Pb monitoring requirements.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5956 Name: Mark R. Vickery Organization: Texas Commission on Environmental Qua lity (TCEQ) Comment: Monitoring Near Airports The analysis pres ented in the proposed rule for establishing a lead emissions threshold fo r ambient air monitoring for airports is inappropriate because children do not h ave practical access to soil or interior surfaces as close to the piston engine run -up, hold-short, and take-off areas of a taxiway—runway pair as the monitor near the blast fence has at the Santa Monica airport (East Tarmac Site #3, proposed rule reference: Fine, Philip (2007)). Having children riding in aircraft taxiing, landing, or taking off from an airport does not present the practical poss ibility of significant lead exposure from lead deposited in soil on the airport property. For airports without practical access to areas closer than the d istance of the Residence Site242 #2 from the end of the runway and the piston engine run-up and hold—short areas of a runway, it would be appropriate to use t he data from Residence Site #2 to establish the annual lead emissions threshold for an airport. Using the methodology in the proposed rule, the three- month lead average at Residence Site #2 is close to 0.03 micrograms per cubic meter (pg/mg). Taking the ratio of the 0.03 ug/mg to the 0.15 pg/ms level of the stand ard demonstrates that the Santa Monica airport, which has 0.4 tons per year o f lead emissions, would have to have approximately 2.0 tons per year of lea d emissions to produce an ambient air lead concentration equal to the NAAQS a t Residence Site #2. For this reason, it would be inappropriate to lower the annual lead emissions monitoring threshold at airports below l.0 tons of per year for any airport without practical access for children to an area wi thin the distance of Residence Site #2 to the run-up, hold—short, and take-off are as of a taxiway- runway pair at the airport. Because of the lack of information on piston—engine aircraft landing and take-off operations at some airports, i t would be helpful if the EPA developed a methodology for using the annual amount of leaded aviation gasoline sales at an airport to calculate the annua l lead emissions from the airport. An alternative would be to develop a metho dology for using the ratio of the leaded aviation gasoline to turbine engine fuel sold at an airport together with the total number of landings and take-off oper ations at the airport to calculate the annual lead emissions from the airpor t. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5943
Name: Barbara Kwetz Organization: Massachusetts Department of Environme ntal Protection (MassDEP)
Comment: MassDEP has submitted the calculations com paring EPA's assumptions and MA actual activity data, along with the supporting documentation of GA/AQ operations and piston engine fraction, to EPA staff and has requested that the activity data and lead e missions in EPA's 2008 NEI database be revised to reflect the MAQ actual airpo rt data. Since the MassDEP lead emission estimates for these airports are belo w the 0.50 tpy, MassDEP also has requested that these MA airports be removed fro m EPA's list of airports that exceed the proposed 0.5 tpy lead emissions threshol d for source-oriented monitoring. Response: The EPA appreciates the additional inform ation provided and has updated our emission estimates accordingly. Howeve r, we do note that the information provided on one airport indicates that the twin engine usage at that airport is much greater than that assumed in the de fault calculations. When this new information is used (in addition to the other i nformation provided for this airport) we estimate that the emissions from that a irport are above 0.50 tpy.243 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5942
Name: B. Keith Overcash Organization: North Carolina Department of Environm ent and Natural Resources (NCDENR) Comment: NCDAQ believes that EPA should address the lead emissions from airports by adopting fuel standards that eliminate lead on an appropriate timetable. Otherwise, if a state monitors a violati on at an airport, the state has limited authority to require emissions reductions. Therefore, a national approach is needed to reduce the lead emissions fro m airports. If the EPA finds it necessary to monitor for lead at airports, the N CDAQ supports the recommendation by the NACAA that the EPA develop a small short-term airport monitoring study of 10 to 20 general aviati on airports emitting more than 0.5 tpy prior to the deployment of a full airp ort monitoring program. The State and local agencies need more guidance on how to determine sound monitor siting criteria as well as to evaluate what the threshold for lead emissions should be at airports. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6100
Name: David J. Shaw Organization: New York State Department of Environm ental Conservation (NYSDEC) Comment: The Department does not agree with the pro posal to require lead monitoring at general aviation airports that are es timated to have lead emissions of less than 1.0 ton per year. Other airport monito ring studies not mentioned in this proposal have not found significant lead emiss ions in the communities surrounding the facilities. Since it is possible th at the largest general aviation airports do emit enough lead to be a concern, the E PA should require monitoring for general aviation airports that emit more than 1.0 tpy lead. It is important to remember that airport emissions are no t from a single emission point but along a line as planes take off and land. Emissions are further dispersed by the propellers. The maximum ground lev el concentration from this scenario will be lower than would happen if the sam e emissions were emitted from a stack. New York believes that choosing a hig her threshold will result in monitoring at enough airports to determine whether or not general aviation airports cause elevated lead concentrations in neig hboring communities. The EPA does not have enough information to justify mon itoring at airports with emissions over 0.5 tpy. Since it may be that the la rgest general aviation sources could have an impact on neighborhood emissions, the EPA should require lead244 monitoring for general aviation airports with annua l lead emissions over 1.0 tpy. This higher threshold will provide the necessa ry monitoring data that will be used to determine if the largest general aviatio n airports are significant sources of lead. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5944
Name: Dick Valentinetti Organization: National Association of Clean Air Age ncies (NACAA)
Comment: Due to the limited number of studies that have evaluated ambient lead sampling methodologies and concentrations from airports, which EPA notes in its proposal,3 NACAA strongly urges EPA de velop a small pilot airport monitoring study of general aviation airpor ts emitting more than 1 tpy of lead prior to the deployment of a full airport moni toring program. This is necessary in order to determine sound sampling siti ng criteria and evaluate whether the 0.5 tpy threshold should be applicable to airports. Working with NACAA, lessons learned in the smaller, more focused networks could be used to build a more cost effective, scientifically soun d national airport monitoring network. Requirements for lead monitoring near smal ler airports should take effect two years after the promulgation of the fina l rule. This would allow sufficient time to evaluate pilot monitoring projec ts and determine the best way to address ambient lead concentrations near airport s. Response: Responded to in preamble.245



## Comments on Non-Source-Oriented Monitoring

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5951
Name: Avinash Kar Organization: Natural Resources Defense Council (NR DC) et al. Comment: However, the inclusion of lead monitoring in the NCore network does not sufficiently address all of the original o bjectives of the population-based monitoring that EPA seeks to repla ce with the proposal on the NCore network. EPA required population-based monito ring to achieve three objectives: 1) to measure neighborhood scale lead c oncentrations in urban areas impacted by resuspended dust from non-inventoried s ources such as roadways, closed industrial sources which previously were sig nificant sources of lead, hazardous waste sites, construction and demolition projects, or other fugitive dust sources of lead; 2) to assist in determining n onattainment boundaries; and 3) to help in better characterizing population expo sure to ambient air related lead. 74 Fed. Reg. at 69055. EPA suggests in its pr oposal that the NCore network can help achieve these objectives and that of supporting the development of long-term trends at typical concentr ation sites. Id. at 69056. However, the NCore network is ill-equipped to achie ve the first and second objectives. The spatial heterogeneity of current da y and past emissions and lead contamination reservoirs in soils due to legacy pol lution means that the these monitors will not be sufficient to capture all area s of elevated lead concentrations. In particular, the potential for re -suspension of lead contaminated soils to result in an ongoing public h ealth threat will not be adequately addressed and monitored through the incl usion of lead in the NCore monitoring network because the NCore network monito ring locations To Protect Public Health With an Adequate Margin of Sa fety, EPA Should Revise the Proposed Language at Subsection 4.5(a) to 40 C. F.R. Part 58, Appendix D to Provide More Guidance to States on the Kinds of Sources Which Are Expected to Or Have Been Shown to Contribute to” NA AQS Violations. The re-suspension of lead contaminated soils has been f ound in multiple studies to be a major contributor to airborne lead concentrati ons. Moreover, higher airborne lead concentrations were measured near are as impacted by historic lead pollution such as near roadways and previous i ndustrial activities. 9 10 11 The proposed rule recognizes the potential threat p osed by these sources and refers to them as non-inventoried sources,” stating that “[s]ome sources of lead which are not in the current NEI that could result in ambient lead concentrations in excess of the lead NAAQS have been identified. 7 4 Fed. Reg. at 69055. Research, such as the study conducted by Young et a l. (2002), where contaminated soils were analyzed for their potentia l to contribute to airborne lead concentrations have demonstrated the potential for these areas to result in concentrations that could exceed the NAAQS.12 Howev er, the proposed monitoring rule is not sufficient to ensure that mo nitoring of these sites is included in state monitoring plans. The monitoring rule should be revised to246 provide specific guidance to states on the developm ent of monitoring plans that include non- inventoried sources such as areas heav ily impacted by historic lead emissions. Community level studies have demons trated that these areas include those near roadways that received heavy tra ffic before the phase out of leaded gasoline and closed industrial facilities. G uidance could require for instance the review of relevant databases (such as those listing superfund and brownfield sites or other assessments of contaminat ed sites) and studies (including academic and community level surveys) to identify those areas with documented lead contamination, and particular vigil ance for sites likely to pose a thread of airborne lead Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5942
Name: B. Keith Overcash Organization: North Carolina Department of Environm ent and Natural Resources (NCDENR) Comment: NCDAQ supports requiring lead monitoring a t NCore sites rather than the separate non-source-oriented monitoring lo cations. Using the NCore sites provides efficient use of EPA and state resou rces and provides data on background levels of lead most cost effectively. In requiring lead monitoring at NCore sites, the EPA should also allow flexibility so that agencies with multiple monitoring sites in an MSA could have an o ption us using a site in the MSA other than the NCore site for lead monitoring i f it was more suitable site for lead monitoring or it allowed agencies to use t heir resources more effectively. With regards to establishing a populat ion threshold for requiring lead monitoring at NCore sites, the EPA should only consider requiring all NCore sties to monitor for lead if the EPA can affo rd to pay for the lead monitoring at all NCore sites. In addition, the NCD AQ urges the EPA to evaluate the lead data obtained at the NCore sites after five years and provide a means to reduce lead monitoring at NCore sites, if the data supports it, back to the original NCore design plan of one lead monitor per region at the NCore site in the largest metropolitan area in the region. The re are more pressing demands for our limited funding than maintaining lead monit ors indefinitely that consistently measure levels that are less than 50 p ercent of the standard. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5951
Name: Avinash Kar247 Organization: Natural Resources Defense Council (NR DC) et al. Comment: EPA Should Require Lead Monitoring at All NCore Sites to Gather Data on Multi-Pollutant Exposures Across the Countr y, Including Lead, But Must Create Other Mechanisms to Meet the Other Obje ctives of Population-Based Monitoring and to Protect Public H ealth With an Adequate Margin of Safety. We support the inclusion of lead in the proposed NCore monitoring network because including lead in the ne twork will provide valuable data on multi-pollutant exposures in citie s and towns across the county. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5944
Name: Dick Valentinetti Organization: National Association of Clean Air Age ncies (NACAA) Comment: NACAA supports the agency’s proposal to co nduct non-source-oriented lead monitoring using the NCore network. The Association recommends that EPA require monitoring only at NCore sites located in larger urban areas, i.e., CBSAs with a p opulation greater than 500,000. Doing so would allow states to use their l imited resources to focus non-source-oriented monitoring and control strategi es in the most sensitive areas. In addition to using the NCore network, EPA should consider supplementing non-source oriented monitoring of lea d by incorporating data from other federal programs that conduct lead sampl ing. For example, both the National Air Toxics Trends Stations (NATTS) and Che mical Speciation Network (CSN) collect samples that are analyzed for lead; however the lead sampling data extracted does not utilize a Federal Reference Method (FRM) or Federal Equivalent Method (FEM) for lead. State and local agencies should be permitted to use NATTS and CSN data for attainment designations in the event that the data show concentrations less than 80% of the NAAQS and the relevant NCore site is unaffected by nearby sources. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5946
Name: Arthur N. Marin Organization: Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM)248 Comment: The NESCAUM states urge EPA to exclude rur al NCore sites from its proposal to require lead monitoring at all NCor e sites (74 FR 69055). The proposed inclusion of the rural sites is inconsiste nt with the monitoring goal and would be a waste of state resources. To better address EPA’s intended goal for the monitoring network, we recommend that the s iting of urban community-scale lead monitoring not be constrained to NCore sites, but be allowed to be located at other appropriate monitori ng sites such as National Air Toxics Trend Stations (NATTS), which tend to be sit ed in “hot-spot” areas for other pollutants. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5963 Name: James L. Kavanaugh Organization: Missouri Department of Natural Resour ces (MODNR) Comment: We support the use of NCore sites for long -term monitoring of airborne lead concentrations, especially in urban e nvironments. However, we suggest that, for this purpose, high volume PM10 sa mpling with analysis by inductively coupled plasma/mass spectrometry (ICP/M S) should be approved as an appropriate method in addition to low volume P1VI10 sampling or high volume total suspended particulate sampling. Specif ically, the Blair Street station in St. Louis has been designated as an NCor e site. Lead (and other metallic species) concentrations have been measured at that site by high volume PM 10 with ICP/MS analysis for several years as a p art of the National Air Toxics Trends Sites (NATTS) program, and these meas urements are expected to continue. There is no technical reason why that measurement cannot continue to provide, data on long-term trends in ur ban ambient lead concentrations in that area and fulfill the require ments of the NCore program as well as of the NATTS program. Response: Currently, there are no high-volume PM10 samplers approved as either an FRM or FEM for Pb sampling. EPA does not currently have any plans to pursue the development of an approved FRM or FEM for high-volume PM10 Pb sampling. However, monitoring agencies may seek the approval of an FEM under the provisions outlined in 40 CFR part 53 Sub part A.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6066 Name: N. S. Rapp Organization:249 Comment: EPA's proposal to rely on the Wore network for non-source-oriented lead NAAQS monitoring should be supplemented with a dditional monitors sited specifically to measure ambient lead levels i n urban areas. Because the NCore monitoring locations are not chosen on the ba sis of potential lead exposure, the network is unlikely to adequately cha racterize historic lead contamination that can be resuspended in urban area s. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5964
Name: James Brook Organization: Maine Department of Environmental Pro tection (ME DEP) Comment: Maine supports lowering the source-oriente d monitoring threshold and revising the non-source oriented requirements t o include an option of monitoring at NCore sites . However, we believe the option should exist for states to monitor at NCore sites that are located i n larger urban areas, i.e. CBSA's with a population greater than 500,000 but n ot at all NCore sites. The requirement to monitor at all NCore sites places a greater burden on those states that have rural NCore sites and are likely to have extremely low concentrations which may result in a lot of nondetects. If these s ites are the only required monitors in rural states than they are also require d to conduct collocated monitoring at that location which will result in pr ecision data that may not be useful in precision calculations because of the ver y low concentrations . This effort would be a waste of state resources . We wou ld prefer to see the monitoring location requirement be left up to the s tates and EPA regional offices to determine whether a CBSA based or NCore option be implemented . Maine would also encourage EPA to consider other le ad data that is being collected by federal programs and review some of th ose programs to ensure that the data is being collected to meet the current EPA requirements. The IMPROVE program collects lead data at a lot of the rural sites around the country but the current methods do not always follo w the current requirements for lead data collection and analysis. EPA should c onsider reviewing some of those program requirements and incorporate changes so that the data collected can be used to determine compliance with the NAAQS

. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5930
Name: Judith Zwicker250 Organization: JZ Consulting Comment: EPA's proposal to rely on the NCore networ k for non-source-oriented lead NAAQS monitoring should be supplemented with additional monitors sited specifically to measure a mbient lead levels in urban areas. Because the NCore monitoring locations are n ot chosen on the basis of potential lead exposure, the network is unlikely to adequately characterize historic lead contamination that can be resuspended in urban areas. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6100
Name: David J. Shaw Organization: New York State Department of Environm ental Conservation (NYSDEC) Comment: In many CBSAs the tentatively approved NCo re monitoring location is probably well suited for this objective . In other CBSAs, however, there may be additional factors that would make ano ther location better in that it would serve an equally large population but it may be in an area that is expected to have higher ambient lead concentrations. For ins tance, in New York City, the urban National Air Toxics Trends (NATTs) site is lo cated in an area that is likely to have higher lead concentrations than the tentatively approved NCore site. The EPA Regional office should have the latit ude to approve alternate sites if there is evidence that another location is bette r suited. There is no need to require lead monitoring at the rural NCore monitors

. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5926 Name: John H. Melby, Jr. Organization: Bureau of Air Management, Wisconsin D epartment of Natural Resources Comment: The Department supports the removal of pop ulation-oriented monitoring, as proposed in the original rule. Exami nation of existing air toxics monitoring suggests that population-oriented monito ring in Milwaukee and Madison, Wisconsin’s largest urban areas is unneces sary (See Figure 1). Wisconsin supports population-oriented sites locate d at urban NCore locations to protect public health. The Department objects to requiring monitoring at rural NCore sites. We question whether the costs to operate the monitor251 outweigh the benefits of monitoring at rural NCore sites, where concentrations will be extremely low. See the data for Mayville in Figure 1, Wisconsin’s rural NCore site through 2009. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5941
Name: Catharine Fitzsimmons Organization: Iowa Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) Comment: EPA should require lead monitoring at all NCore monitoring sites. States should be encouraged to expand the suite of metals analyized from this analysis to include other toxic metals such as mang anese. Response: Responded to in preamble.252



## Comments on Monitoring Deployment Schedule

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5946
Name: Arthur N. Marin Organization: Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM) Comment: It is critical that EPA recognize that the delay in issuing this NPR, and the consequent delay in finalizing this rule un til late spring 2010, makes it impractical for states to include the new monitorin g requirements in their network plans, which are due June 30, 2010. This de lay also makes it unlikely if not impossible for states to implement the addition al monitoring requirements by the December 30, 2010 deadline. States are exper iencing significant staff cuts and resource constraints in the face of mounti ng new federal monitoring and other requirements related to multiple NAAQS re visions. EPA must find a workable and practical solution that allows adequat e time for states to comply with new monitoring requirements, including additio nal time for implementation, using existing networks as appropri ate, and providing technical and financial assistance. Given the expan ded role that EPA is envisioning for the various monitoring networks and its desire for research data to augment future regulatory decisions, we urge EPA to engage in higher level strategic discussions with the states on these issu es. Such discussions could result in recommendations on how to more efficientl y deploy and use monitoring networks. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5956 Name: Mark R. Vickery Organization: Texas Commission on Environmental Qua lity (TCEQ) Comment: Timeline for Deploying New Monitors A one— year timeline for deploying monitors to NCore sites is reasonable for NCore sites that are already established, If new equipment procurement is involv ed, a deadline shorter than one year after federal funding is provided is not r easonable for NCore sites, For point-source oriented ambient air lead monitors, a one-year deadline for installation is not reasonable. Obtaining a model-r eady emissions inventory for each plant, performing dispersion modeling to deter mine the area of maximum ambient air impact, procuring new monitoring equipm ent, obtaining EPA regional office approval of each site, and negotiat ing a site use agreement, contracting site preparation, and obtaining electri cal service can each require more time than expected. An l8—month timeline would be more reasonable. lf253 a monitor for an airport needs to be sited on the a irport, there is another complication. Federal Aviation Administration appro val of a new installation on an airport can add six months or more to the pro cess of establishing a site. In addition, the data gathering for emissions modeling for airports may require additional months of work, so a more appropriate ti meline for airport impact monitors would be 20—to—24 months. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5953 Name: Sandra F. Veazey Organization: Florida Department of Environmental P rotection Comment: The requirements mentioned above which wou ld mandate the completion of the plan for lead monitoring by June 30, 2010 which is, oddly, one day before the annual monitoring plan for all o ther pollutants is due. It also would only leave 2 weeks to complete the plan after the rule is effective, assuming that could be the case just 90 days after comments are due. This time is insufficient for effective planning. Additionall y, the requirement to have the source monitoring operational due date set to be De cember 30. 2010 is insufficient for the amount of work associated with this proposal. Response: We regret that an error was created when the Federal Register printed the proposed rule. The preamble correctly i ndicated the correct dates (6 months following the publication of the final rule for the plan, and 1 year from the date of the final rule for monitors to begin op eration). However, dates were inserted into the regulatory text based off the dat e of the proposed rule, not the date of the final rule.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5941
Name: Catharine Fitzsimmons Organization: Iowa Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) Comment: Any new source-oriented monitors required under the provisions of this rule should be installed over a two year perio d, with the first tier of source-oriented monitors operational by January of 2012, and the second tier of monitors by January 2013. This will allow States ad equate time to refine emissions estimates by use of stack tests, to model the refined estimates, and to attempt to locate monitoring sites in the "hot spot s" indentified by the modeling.254 Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6025 Name: Michael Villegas Organization: Ventura County Air Pollution Control District (VCAPCD) Comment: It is likely that source-oriented lead mon itoring sites will be new monitoring sites, not operated at existing SLAMS si tes. We note that the current rule allowed a period of over seven months, from the date of the rule's final issuance, to submit a network plan for establ ishing source-oriented lead monitoring sites for sources emitting greater than 1 .0 tpy. EPA's current proposal provides 6 months from the date comments w ere requested on the proposed rule in which to develop and submit a netw ork monitoring plan that identifies the location of source-oriented lead mon itoring sites. Response: This final rule allows for 6 months from the date the final revisions are published to submit their plan, and 1 year to b egin operation of newly required sites.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6064 Name: Myra C. Reece Organization: South Carolina Department of Health a nd Environmental Control Comment: In addition, the department has noticed an inconsistency between the proposed language for 40 CFR Part 58.10 and the language in the preamble concerning submission of the amended plan and estab lishment of source-oriented samplers near stationary sources wi th annual emissions between 0.5 and 1.0 tpy of lead. Response: We regret that an error was created when the Federal Register printed the proposed rule. The preamble correctly i ndicated the correct dates (6 months following the publication of the final rule for the plan, and 1 year from the date of the final rule for monitors to begin op eration). However, dates were inserted into the regulatory text based off the dat e of the proposed rule, not the date of the final rule.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5944255 Name: Dick Valentinetti Organization: National Association of Clean Air Age ncies (NACAA) Comment: NACAA recommends the alternative option, w hich would give state and local agencies adequate time to adjust their re sources and ensure that new monitors are properly sited and supported. This pha sed approach would ease the burden of finding and developing sites, as stat e and local agencies are already under pressure to develop other networks su ch as ozone, NO2, and SO2. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5950
Name: Laurel L. Kroack Organization: Illinois Environmental Protection Age ncy Comment: EPA Should Require Installation of New Sou rce-Oriented Monitors for Sites Between 0.5 and 1 ton per year Over Two Y ears Rather than One. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5942
Name: B. Keith Overcash Organization: North Carolina Department of Environm ent and Natural Resources (NCDENR) Comment: The NCDAQ urges the EPA to reconsider its timeline for deploying new source-oriented monitors for sources emitting b etween 0.50 and 1.0 tpy. It is inefficient and hence more costly to have agenci es amend their monitoring plans in the middle of the cycle. States should be required to include the new lead monitoring requirements in the monitoring plan s that are due after the rule becomes effective and no sooner than July 1, 2011, and start up operation of the new monitors on January 1 of the year after the mon itoring plan is submitted but not before January 1, 2012. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6100
Name: David J. Shaw256 Organization: New York State Department of Environm ental Conservation (NYSDEC) Comment: Due to the timing of the implementation re gulation, monitoring agencies will need a full year to include the new l ead monitors in the annual monitoring network plan. Monitoring Agencies are re quired to submit their annual monitoring network plans on July 1st each ye ar. The schedule to include the lead monitors can only be accommodated if the f inal lead implementation plan is published at least four months before the s ubmittal deadline for the annual network plan. It is likely that the final im plementation plan will not be published until July 2010. This means that the earl iest plan which will include the lead monitors would be submitted in 2011. The E PA may need to allow additional time for the deployment of the monitors for sources that emit between 0.5 and 1.0 tons of lead per year. Emission inventories that have been used to identify sources at levels from 1.0 to 0.50 tons of lead per year are highly suspect and would need to be verified prior to instituting any monitoring plan. Monitoring Agencies will be expected to insta ll an estimated 140 new monitors at locations that are not likely to have e stablished monitoring locations. Establishing new monitors as stand-alone single parameter monitoring sites is the most expensive and labor in tensive way to establish a network. The EPA will need to provide adequate reso urces for the additional monitors and the Monitoring Agencies will need addi tional time to find suitable locations and to purchase and evaluate the new samp ling equipment. Since Federal monitoring resources are distributed annual ly, it will take additional time after the Federal resources are received befor e Monitoring Agencies will be able to begin the operation of the new monitors. It is likely that in most monitoring jurisdictions, specific sources will be ranked as more likely to contribute to high ambient lead concentrations than others. It is appropriate to permit the Monitoring Agencies and the Regional EPA offices to discuss the priority by which monitors should be installed. It is likely that the sources that are lower on the priority list could be eligible fo r monitoring waivers so there would be no need to rush into installing monitors a t low priority locations. The Department agrees that the sources that have the hi ghest potential to contribute to significant lead concentrations in populated are as should have their monitors installed as soon as possible. The factors to be co nsidered when prioritizing the list include the nature and potential quantity of t he emission, the proximity and size of the local population, and the topography an d the meteorology in the receptor area. The Department agrees that a 2 year deployment schedule with the airport monitoring staged in the second year is the preferable schedule. This additional time will permit the state and local age ncies to verify the emissions data from the Response: Responded to in preamble.257 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5949
Name: Teresa Marks Organization: Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) Comment: Lowering the lead monitoring threshold fr om one ton per year (tpy) to 1⁄2 tpy will result in a significant increas e in the state resources required to monitor additional locations that are not necess arily likely to violate the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). Th is is due to EPA’s use of “worst-case” assumptions as a basis for determin ing an appropriate threshold. ADEQ has sited a total of one point-sou rce oriented monitor as a result of the current requirement to assess facilit ies that have reported actual emissions over the one ton per year requirement to assess facilities that have reported actual emissions over the one ton per year threshold. Point source modeling has been submitted in support of monitorin g requirement waivers for several other potentially affected facilities. Fro m this effort, it is apparent that most sources emitting less than one tpy of lead wou ld be candidates for a waiver. A few facilities might not be able to meet the modeling waiver criteria but, due to; variability in the physical conditions at selected sites, the unreliability of comparing modeled outcomes to moni tored results, etc. would not necessarily result in monitored violations. Si nce the monitoring waiver test is to show that modeled emissions do not resul t in an exceedence of half of the level the standard, there is already a low like lihood that new monitoring data would identify NAAQS violations. If EPA does lower the threshold to 1⁄2 tpy, ADEQ supp orts a staged deployment schedule as proposed by EPA. EPA should review any preliminary results from monitors deployed under the existing rule in an eff ort to determine whether its assumptions regarding the need for additional monit oring at facilities with lower emissions are validated. EPA should consider a longer deployment schedule that would be tied to the suggested review of newly acquired data from currently monitored sites. Response: The monitoring waiver provisions will al so apply to emission sources emitting 0.50 tpy or greater but less than 1 tpy. If a monitoring agency can demonstrate that a facility will not cause Pb c oncentrations to equal or exceed 50% of the Pb NAAQS, they may request a moni toring waiver. As such, the only burden to states for those facilitie s will be the costs of performing the modeling and requesting the waiver. As discuss ed in the preamble to the final rule, we believe that some facilities emittin g 0.50 tpy or greater may cause or contribute to an exceedence of the Pb NAAQS. Ho wever, we agree with the commenter that many facilities emitting emitting 0. 50 tpy or greater but less than 1 tpy of Pb will likely be eligible for a moni toring waiver.258



## Comments on Other Aspects of Lead Monitoring

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5926 Name: John H. Melby, Jr. Organization: Bureau of Air Management, Wisconsin D epartment of Natural Resources Comment: The Department encourages EPA to reconside r the use of high volume PM10 samplers for PM10-lead as is used in th e NATTS program. Including this as an acceptable method leverages to xics monitoring data and maximizes use of resources. Technical notes from EP A staff mention that the specifications for these instruments are not as tig ht as the low volume samplers; however, when considered as an entire measurement s ystem, the method has several attributes that balance its performance and this uses the same sampling technology as TSP-lead: Response: Currently, there are no high-volume PM10 samplers approved as either an FRM or FEM for Pb sampling. EPA does not currently have any plans to pursue the development of an approved FRM or FEM for high-volume PM10 Pb sampling. However, monitoring agencies may seek the approval of an FEM under the provisions outlined in 40 CFR part 53 Sub part A.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5926 Name: John H. Melby, Jr. Organization: Bureau of Air Management, Wisconsin D epartment of Natural Resources Comment: The Department is concerned about the avai lability of adequate resources to implement and operate the proposed Lea d monitoring network. EPA must provide states funding, not only to set up the additional sites required by this rule, but also to support operational costs . Wisconsin has a single source-oriented site, which is quite expensive to o perate because it is a single pollutant site that is distant from other monitorin g sites in our network and it requires a collocated monitor. The analytical costs alone will exceed $9000/year. Wisconsin will have great difficulty ab sorbing the operational costs in an already stretched budget for criteria p ollutant monitoring. Response: EPA notes that fiscal year 2010 STAG fund ing has been made available for the purpose of supporting new lead mo nitoring equipment purchases related to this final rule. EPA also note s that additional 2011 STAG funding was proposed to support "core" programs whi ch can include activities259 such as ambient monitoring. EPA will work with the Regional Offices, NACAA, and monitoring agencies to develop a plan fo r allocating these funds to the new monitoring needs related to this final r ule as well as recent NAAQS revisions.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6404
Name: D. and I . Reese Organization:
Comment: "We all breathe the same air" Response: No response needed.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5926 Name: John H. Melby, Jr. Organization: Bureau of Air Management, Wisconsin D epartment of Natural Resources Comment: The Department questions EPA’s assumption that urban NCore sites are likely to have low volume PM10 monitors at thes e sites to support other monitoring requirements. Because of the costs assoc iated with operating these more manual instruments and the associated costs of laboratory analysis, monitoring agencies will more likely operate automa ted instruments for fine and coarse particles at NCore sites that have the a dvantage of near real-time data reporting and lower operational costs. Incorpo rating this assumption into the cost estimates for lead may effectively discour age some monitoring organizations from moving toward more automated met hods for PM2.5, PM10, and PMCoarse. Response: As noted in the preamble to the proposed rule, we recognize that some NCore sites will not have the necessary sample r to perform Pb-PM10 sampling. These monitoring agencies will need to pu rchase, install and operate an additional sampler to perform Pb sampling.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6559
Name: R. Fahrner Organization:260 Comment: No comment in document. Response: No response needed.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5945
Name: Christina Ritter Organization: Comment: Because healthy air is important for all h uman and environmental health, I further urge EPA to attach specific condi tions to the issuance of waivers of the source-oriented monitoring requireme nts for lead and to provide more guidance to states concerning the kinds of sou rces that are expected to contribute to exceedances of the lead air standard. The conditions for obtaining waivers should be sufficiently strict to limit thei r use and states should be advised how to conduct an adequate monitoring progr am so that their states demonstrably meet the standards for healthy air. Fo r example, site-specific data rather than generic, unreliable emissions estimates should be used to evaluate the impact of a source's emissions on ambient air l ead concentrations. Response: The EPA did not propose changes to the ex isting waiver provisions. As such, this comment is not germane to this rule m aking.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5928
Name: J. Morian Organization: Comment: I also ask that the EPA be required to att ach specific conditions to any waivers of the source-oriented monitoring requi rements for lead, and that these be sufficiently strict to limit their use. Response: The EPA did not propose changes to the ex isting waiver provisions. As such, this comment is not germane to this rule m aking.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5929 Name: Anonymous Organization: Comment: It is our gravest responsibility to enforc e clean and respectful use of resources for the protection of all, today and for the generations to come.261 Response: No response needed.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5944
Name: Dick Valentinetti Organization: National Association of Clean Air Age ncies (NACAA) Comment: NACAA urges EPA to update the National Mon itoring Strategy with NACAA collaboration and input that incorporate s this new direction along with the different philosophies and funding issues involved. For example, if, as described above, EPA supplemented nonsource- orient ed monitoring of lead by incorporating data from other federal programs that conduct lead sampling, significant cost savings could be realized without disrupting the ability to track ambient lead concentrations. Response: The EPA is attempting to leverage existin g networks as much as possible. This final rule replaces the existing non -source-oriented monitoring requirement with a requirement to measure Pb at urb an NCore in order to make additional use of PM10 samples that will be taken a s part of the PMc requirement.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5944
Name: Dick Valentinetti Organization: National Association of Clean Air Age ncies (NACAA) Comment: As state and local agencies work to implem ent new monitoring requirements, it is imperative that monitoring acti vities be fully funded. This includes not only the costs of equipment, but also staff and operation and maintenance costs. The National Monitoring Strategy developed by EPA and NACAA should also be updated to incorporate changes to the monitoring network and ensure that economically sustainable mo nitoring strategies are implemented. EPA estimates that its proposed revisi ons to the lead monitoring requirements would raise the level of new monitors from approximately 212 monitors to up to 352 monitors. This represents an increase of more than 50%, and will require a concomitant increase in staff an d maintenance resources of state and local agencies. NACAA estimates that each new sampling site will require an additional .60 to .65 of a full time equ ivalent (FTE) to adequately locate, develop, operate, and maintain; these costs are not addressed in EPA’s estimates. In order to fulfill their new monitoring obligations, state and local agencies must receive full funding, including fundi ng for necessary increases in staff and operation and maintenance costs. NACAA st rongly urges EPA to fully fund the monitoring program. New federal fund ing should be provided262 under Clean Air Act §103, rather than §105, which r equires matching funds from already strapped state and local budgets. Give n the new monitoring requirements in the lead, nitrogen dioxide (NO2), a nd sulfur dioxide (SO2) proposals, state and local agencies are looking at a significant overall increase in monitoring activities, which must be fully funde d in order to ensure full implementation of the new requirements. Response: EPA notes that fiscal year 2010 STAG fund ing has been made available for the purpose of supporting new lead mo nitoring equipment purchases related to this final rule. EPA also note s that additional 2011 STAG funding was proposed to support "core" programs whi ch can include activities such as ambient monitoring. EPA will work with the Regional Offices, NACAA, and monitoring agencies to develop a plan fo r allocating these funds to the new monitoring needs related to this final r ule as well as recent NAAQS revisions.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6574
Name: A. Servatius Organization: Comment: I appreciate your agency's efforts to curt ail the world's worst coal mining, mountaintop removal . This strip mining con tinues to decapitate America's oldest mountains, clearcut lush forests, destroy diverse wildlife habitat, pollute headwater streams, poison drinking water and threaten local communities . Already several hundred mountains hav e been leveled throughout Appalachia . Recently, blasting began on Coal River Mountain, which has the highest peaks ever slated for mining in West Virginia . Massey Energy's mining operation would destroy over 6,000 acres of the mountain, wipe out 10 square miles of lush forests, create 18 valley fills, devastate the Clear Fork watershed and ruin the lives of local re sidents who are fighting valiantly to defend their homes . If mountaintop re moval is allowed to proceed, one of the best opportunities for clean energy alte rnatives will be destroyed as well . A leveled mountain would mean the loss of el evation to power a wind farm supported by local citizens that could provide electricity for 70,000 homes, create 700 long-term green jobs and generate $1 .7 million in annual county tax revenue . In addition, Massey is detonat ing dynamite within 100 yards of the largest coal sludge impoundment in the country . If the blasts breach the Brushy Fork retention pond, more than ei ght billion gallons of toxic coal slurry will spill out, endangering the lives o f hundreds of people downstream who would have little or no time to evac uate . To date, West Virginia Governor Manchin has rejected the pleas of local residents to save Coal River Mountain by supporting the wind project . Other state and federal officials have also turned a deaf ear. Without a do ubt, the Obama263 administration is the last, best hope to save Coal River Mountain and protect the people who live in its shadow . Coal River Mountain may well represent the fork in the road when it comes to fulfilling the Ob ama administration's vision for America's energy future . The choice is between forging a path toward a clean energy economy or continuing on with "busines s as usual" that would reduce another Appalachian peak into a pile of rubb le . Please direct the EPA to intervene immediately to stop the blasting of Coal River Mountain . Response: This comment is not germane to this curre nt rulemaking. No response is needed.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5944
Name: Dick Valentinetti Organization: National Association of Clean Air Age ncies (NACAA) Comment: NACAA also requests that EPA provide clari ty regarding the discontinuation of source oriented monitors. The fi nal rule should clearly set out the conditions under which monitoring at a spec ific source is no longer required. NACAA recommends that monitoring be disco ntinued under the following conditions: if, utilizing sampling and an alysis methodologies that provide scientifically valid results, three years o f data from a relevant monitor show ambient lead concentrations below 50% of the N AAQS, that monitor should be discontinued. If only FRM/FEM methods are allowed, the threshold of ambient lead concentrations should be raised fro m 50% to 70% of the NAAQS. Response: The EPA did not propose changes to the ex isting waiver provisions. As such, this comment is not germane to this rule m aking. However, we note that the existing rules allow monitoring agencies t o request a waiver if historic data indicates that the design value is less than 5 0% of the NAAQS. As such, a monitoring agency may request to shut down a site i f after three years of monitoring, the maximum 3-month rolling average Pb concentration is less than 0.075 ug/m3 .

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5944
Name: Dick Valentinetti Organization: National Association of Clean Air Age ncies (NACAA) Comment: As they develop plans for siting new sourc e-oriented monitors, state and local agencies must be permitted the flexibilit y to determine the best location for the monitors, according to applicable science. In making these264 determinations, the agencies must be able to consid er such variables as potential exposures and access to locations with ad equate siting. In order to ensure that monitors are placed in the most benefic ial locations, NACAA encourages a process whereby EPA Regions work with state and local agencies in siting new source-oriented monitors. Response: The existing monitoring requirements allo wed monitoring agencies to consider logistics and the potential for populat ion exposure when siting source oriented monitors. We have made clarifying e dits to that language to make it more clear what was intended.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5931
Name: P. Zimmerman Organization: Comment: Because healthy air is important for all h uman and environmental health, I further urge EPA to attach specific condi tions to the issuance of waivers of the source-oriented monitoring requireme nts for lead and to provide more guidance to states concerning the kinds of sou rces that are expected to contribute to exceedances of the lead air standard. The conditions for obtaining waivers should be sufficiently strict to limit thei r use and states should be advised how to conduct an adequate monitoring progr am so that their states demonstrably meet the standards for healthy air. Response: The EPA did not propose changes to the ex isting waiver provisions. As such, this comment is not germane to this rule m aking.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5941
Name: Catharine Fitzsimmons Organization: Iowa Department of Natural Resources (IDNR)
Comment: EPA should work with States to evaluate th e costs associated with the additional emissions assessment, ambient impact assessment, monitoring equipment purchases, and operation and maintenance of monitors required to implement this rulemaking, and provide these funds to States in a timely manner so that they can begin work on this effort. In view of the tight budgets faced by Iowa and most other States, we recommend t hat these funds be allocated as 103 grants to States, so that State ma tching funds will not be required. Response: EPA notes that fiscal year 2010 STAG fund ing has been made265 available for the purpose of supporting new lead mo nitoring equipment purchases related to this final rule. EPA also note s that additional 2011 STAG funding was proposed to support "core" programs whi ch can include activities such as ambient monitoring. EPA will work with the Regional Offices, NACAA, and monitoring agencies to develop a plan fo r allocating these funds to the new monitoring needs related to this final r ule as well as recent NAAQS revisions.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5932
Name: C. Boschert Organization: Comment: Because healthy air is important for all h uman and environmental health, I further urge EPA to attach specific condi tions to the issuance of waivers of the source-oriented monitoring requireme nts for lead and to provide more guidance to states concerning the kinds of sou rces that are expected to contribute to exceedances of the lead air standard. The conditions for obtaining waivers should be sufficiently strict to limit thei r use and states should be advised how to conduct an adequate monitoring progr am so that their states demonstrably meet the standards for healthy air. Fo r example, site-specific data rather than generic, unreliable emissions estimates should be used to evaluate the impact of a source's emissions on ambient air l ead concentrations. I support expansion of the lead monitoring network because th e existing monitoring network for lead is Response: The EPA did not propose changes to the ex isting waiver provisions. As such, this comment is not germane to this rule m aking.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6568 Name: D. Madvig Organization: Comment: Please get the lead out! Response: No response needed.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5937 Name: L. Limberg266 Organization: Comment: We must strengthen air quality standards. We truly need not poison our people in the name of better commerce and indus try. Please manage your integrity consistent with what is morally & ethical ly right. Response: No response needed.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5938
Name: D. A. McDaniel Organization: Comment: Because healthy air is important for all h uman and environmental health, I further urge EPA to attach specific condi tions to the issuance of waivers of the source-oriented monitoring requireme nts for lead and to provide more guidance to states concerning the kinds of sou rces that are expected to contribute to exceedances of the lead air standard. The conditions for obtaining waivers should be sufficiently strict to limit thei r use and states should be advised how to conduct an adequate monitoring progr am so that their states demonstrably meet the standards for healthy air. Fo r example, site-specific data rather than generic, unreliable emissions estimates should be used to evaluate the impact of a source's emissions on ambient air l ead concentrations. Response: Responded to in preamble.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5940
Name: Gail Wechsler Organization: Jewish Community Relations Council Comment: Because healthy air is important for all h uman and environmental health, JCRC further urges EPA to attach specific c onditions to the issuance of waivers of the source-oriented monitoring requireme nts for lead. The conditions for obtaining waivers should be sufficie ntly strict to limit their use and states should be advised how to conduct an adeq uate monitoring program so that their states demonstrably meet the standard s for healthy air. For example, site-specific data rather than generic, un reliable emissions estimates should be used to evaluate the impact of a source’s emissions on ambient air lead concentrations. Response: The EPA did not propose changes to the ex isting waiver provisions. As such, this comment is not germane to this rule m aking.267 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5941
Name: Catharine Fitzsimmons Organization: Iowa Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) Comment: We do not think it is appropriate nor cons istent with previous practice to require a 50% margin of safety for all assessment tools used to establish NAAQS compliance for the purposes of plac ing air monitors. Response: The EPA did not propose changes to the ex isting waiver provisions. As such, this comment is not germane to this rule m aking.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6562 Name: R. Myers Organization:
Comment: No comment contained in documents. Response: No response needed.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5941
Name: Catharine Fitzsimmons Organization: Iowa Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) Comment: To the extent that the purpose of the emis sions thresholds in the permitting and monitoring rules are the same, i.e., we urge EPA to require an ambient impact analysis in cases where the NAAQS is likely to be threatened, we urge EPA to set them at the same level. Response: The final rule did not propose changes to the permitting requirements, and as such, this comment is not germ ane to this rule making.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5942
Name: B. Keith Overcash Organization: North Carolina Department of Environm ent and Natural Resources (NCDENR) Comment: Like many states, North Carolina is in poo r financial condition due268 to the current economic situation. For North Caroli na, the estimated costs of deploying a lead monitoring network at both Nationa l Core (NCore) sites is estimated to be approximately $10,000, assuming we use the existing low-volume PM 10 monitors, with an annual operating cost of $60,000. This cost is significantly less than the cost that the s tate would have incurred in the original lead monitoring network where separate com munity-wide monitoring sites were required in Metropolitan Statistical Are as greater than 500,000 people, but it is still an additional burden during a difficult time. In addition to expected costs associated with the proposed lead mo nitoring network, the NCDAQ also has to determine how to fund the additio nal monitoring requirements proposed in the ozone monitoring rule and the monitoring that will be required for the new Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) and the proposed Sulfur Di oxide (SO2) rule. Furthermore, the NCDAQ is expending resources to im plement and enforce the area source maximum achievable control technology ( MACT) and generally available control technology (GACT) regulations, as well as the expected resources that will be needed for the climate chang e regulations that are on the horizon. The various new requirements and shrinking funds are placing the NCDAQ in a position where we will not be able to fu nd all of EPA's new requirements. The proposed changes to the community -wide monitoring requirements will help. EPA needs to fully fund the cost of analyzing the required lead samples. These funds need to be in th e form of Section 103 grant monies rather than Section 105 grant monies. In the financial situation that many states fine themselves in at this time, some m ay not have the funds to match additional Section 105 grant monies. Response: EPA notes that fiscal year 2010 STAG fund ing has been made available for the purpose of supporting new lead mo nitoring equipment purchases related to this final rule. EPA also note s that additional 2011 STAG funding was proposed to support "core" programs whi ch can include activities such as ambient monitoring. EPA will work with the Regional Offices, NACAA, and monitoring agencies to develop a plan fo r allocating these funds to the new monitoring needs related to this final r ule as well as recent NAAQS revisions.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5930
Name: Judith Zwicker Organization: JZ Consulting Comment: Because healthy air is important for all h uman and environmental health, I further urge EPA to attach specific condi tions to the issuance of waivers of the source-oriented monitoring requireme nts for lead and to provide more guidance to states concerning the kinds of sou rces that are expected to contribute to exceedances of the lead air standard. The conditions for obtaining269 waivers should be sufficiently strict to limit thei r use and states should be advised how to conduct an adequate monitoring progr am so that their states demonstrably meet the standards for healthy air. Fo r example, site-specific data rather than generic, unreliable emissions estimates should be used to evaluate the impact of a source’s emissions on ambient air l ead concentrations. Response: The EPA did not propose changes to the ex isting waiver provisions. As such, this comment is not germane to this rule m aking.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6143

Name: K. Maser Organization: Comment: I strongly urge the EPA to do its job: pro tect our children and our adults too from air polluted by lead. This should b e a no brainer!....... Response: No response needed.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6213 Name: J. Erdman, Ph.D. Organization: Comment: Some four decades ago, I and several colle agues documented the reason for horses killed in pasturage next to a hau l-route in the Viburnum Lead Belt of Missouri. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead _Belt Lead poisoning from lead dust blew off uncovered trucks, a practice sin ce corrected. Analysis of the branches of juniper trees growing along the road re vealed high lead values. Those and other findings were published in the Proc eedings of the 4th Annual Conference on Trace Substances in Environmental Hea lth, 1971. "Roadside effects on trace-metal content in some rocks, soils , and plants of Missouri, " by Connor, Erdman, Sims and Ebens. Response: No response needed.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5960 Name: Russ Murray Organization: Ohio Cast Metals Association (OCMA)270 Comment: 3. Use of NEI Emissions Data OCMA is conce rned that the use of the emissions information contained in the 2002 and 2005 National Emissions Inventory (NEI) is no longer representative because many metal casters have indicated significantly lower emissions than those reported in the 2002 and 2005 NEI due to the type of scrap available, implem entation of scrap management plans and improved emission estimation m ethodologies. Most foundries have implemented scrap management plans w ith scrap specifications designed to eliminate or minimize the amount of lea d that is charged in the furnaces. This practice is necessary to maintain th e quality of cast metal products as well as for environmental and workplace exposure considerations. In several recent air emission rulemakings applicab le to foundries, EPA has cited data that demonstrates significant reductions in hazardous air pollutants over the past two decades. EPA has taken credit for these reductions as part of its overall program to reduce hazardous air polluta nt emissions from industry sources like foundries. EPA’s Sector Strategies Pro gram has also reported significant reductions in hazardous air pollutant e missions from the metal casting industry in its 2006 Performance Report. Ac cording to this report that relies upon Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) data, fou ndries have reduced hazardous air pollutant emissions by 58 percent fro m 1994 to 2003 (this includes reductions of lead emissions). Given the a bove, it is unlikely that this trend and the industry’s current practices that red uce lead emissions are accurately reflected in the 2002 and 2005 NEI datab ase. Response: Monitoring agencies are encouraged to use the most recent and accurate estimates of Pb emissions when determining the applicability of these monitoring requirements.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5961 Name: Jerry Call Organization: American Foundry Society (AFS) Comment: This comment is a duplicate of comment id 5957. Response:

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5964
Name: James Brook Organization: Maine Department of Environmental Pro tection (ME DEP) Comment: Maine also encourages EPA to fully fund th e lead monitoring program. Adding a monitoring program that has been discontinued for the past271 12 years due to the low concentrations will require additional investments in monitors and analytical costs as well as staff to o perate the program. New funding for this program should be provided under t he 103 grants rather than the 105 grant which will require matching funds fro m the states . Response: EPA notes that fiscal year 2010 STAG fund ing has been made available for the purpose of supporting new lead mo nitoring equipment purchases related to this final rule. EPA also note s that additional 2011 STAG funding was proposed to support "core" programs whi ch can include activities such as ambient monitoring. EPA will work with the Regional Offices, NACAA, and monitoring agencies to develop a plan fo r allocating these funds to the new monitoring needs related to this final r ule as well as recent NAAQS revisions.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6045
Name: K. Townsend Organization: Comment: With all the potential links to ADHD, low IQ and other problems in children (that, by the way, do not go away once the y grow up), we really can't afford to take chances with lead emissions. Any pre ventable lead emissions should be curbed, at least as well as they were bef ore the 2008 legislation. Response: No response needed.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6305
Name: J. Bressler Organization: Comment: We are seeing more and more people with br eathing issues that are now becoming almost an epidemic. The lackadaisical actions taken by the EPA during the past administration have only added to t he dangers we all face every time we take a breath outside. It is now time for t he EPA to take a real stand and do its job: PROTECTING THE ENVIRONMEN, not the coff ers of big energy! Response: No response needed.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6037
Name: T. Birch272 Organization: Comment: Perhaps Congress forgot why the EPA was cr eated in the first place. Why don't you remind them? And what are you going t o do when your 'monitoring' illuminates abuses? Fine them? Or forc e them to shut down that specific program? Prosecute for negligence and enda ngerment? You guys better get serious, and angrier at Big Industry. TH AT is what you originally were told to do, anyway. And whether Congress is cu rrently cooperative or not, the EPA should continually remind them of the missi on statement, as set forth due to enacting legislation, and our ever evolving industrial society and their harmful toys. Justice, Tranquility, and the General Welfare, people: It's Constitutional. Thank you, whoever is reading this. Response: No response needed.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6140 Name: G. Smolinsky Organization:
Comment: Airborne lead is toxic and can cause a hos t of medical problems, especially in children who are more susceptible to the harmful effects of lead exposure. Some of the problems it causes include lo wer IQ, behavioral problems, brain damage, kidney damage and cardiovas cular injury Response: No response needed.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6313
Name: C. Dolan Organization: Comment: Are you kidding? It's lead. It makes peopl e stupid. Monitor it. Response: No response needed.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5957 Name: Jerry Call Organization: American Foundry Society (AFS) Comment: The Metal Casting Industry Has Significant ly Reduced Lead273 Emissions A document in the docket for the November 12, 2008 rule provides a summary of stationary source lead emissions data th at is based on the 2002 National Emissions Inventory (NEI). As part of the administrative record for this proposed action, EPA also referenced the 2005 NEI data. AFS is concerned that these data may be misleading and do not necess arily represent the foundry industry’s current and historic practices to reduce lead emissions. In fact, many AFS member foundries have indicated that their curr ent lead emissions are significantly lower than the levels reported in the 2002 and 2005 NEI data bases due to reductions that have occurred since the time of reporting or due to improved estimation and measurement techniques for lead emissions. The primary source of lead at a foundry is generally fr om the tramp lead found in the scrap metal used as the raw materials for furnaces. Lead is considered an unwanted contaminant in the feedstock. Most foundri es have implemented scrap management plans with scrap specifications de signed to eliminate or minimize the amount of lead that is charged in the furnaces. This practice is necessary to maintain the quality of cast metal pro ducts as well as for environmental and workplace exposure considerations . In addition, many foundries have air pollution control devices in pla ce that are designed to capture particulate matter (that may contain lead) from mel ting furnaces. These efforts have significantly reduced lead emissions from foun dries. Even EPA has recognized the progress of the metal casting indust ry in reducing emissions of hazardous air pollutants such as lead. In several r ecent air emission rulemakings applicable to foundries, EPA has cited data that de monstrates significant reductions in hazardous air pollutants over the pas t two decades. EPA has taken credit for these reductions as part of its overall program to reduce hazardous air pollutant emissions from industry sources like foun dries. EPA’s Sector Strategies Program has also reported significant re ductions in hazardous air pollutant emissions from the metal casting industry in its 2006 Performance Report. According to this report that relies upon T oxic Release Inventory (TRI) data, foundries have reduced hazardous air pollutan t emissions by 58 percent from 1994 to 2003 (this includes reductions of lead emissions). A very large percentage of this reduction occurred more recently during the past ten years. These significant reductions in hazardous air pollu tant emissions coupled with the recent implementation of new hazardous air poll utant regulations suggest a continuing trend of further reductions of lead emis sions for foundries. It is, therefore, unlikely that this trend and the industr y’s current practices that reduce lead emissions are accurately reflected in t he 2002 and 2005 NEI database. Response: Monitoring agencies are encouraged to use the most recent and accurate estimates of Pb emissions when determining the applicability of these monitoring requirements.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5985274 Name: L. Massman-Johnson Organization: Comment: When doctors in an ER triage an extreme ca se they act immediately and decisively on ONLY the most serious and immanen tly life-threatening issues. Nothing else matters until the patient is s tabilized. We are approaching a triage decision for Global Warming on Earth. Life a s we know it is bleeding out. But we can see exactly where to act – stop the mega-polluters. YOU just need the courage to do it. The United States has cr eated the vast majority of the historical greenhouse gas emissions, and even today is just barely eclipsed by China's total annual output. But China has 4 times the population of the US, which effectively means each US citizen STILL gener ates about 4 times the pollution as the Chinese. The United States and Chi na together create some 40% of current emissions worldwide, and it is painf ul and ironic that for yet ANOTHER year neither of us will ratify Kyoto. We ca n't control China, so what is the best place for US decision-makers to fo cus triage efforts to stop the life-threatening hemorrhage that we created? The ob vious target is the mega-polluters. If we know half of US emissions can be plugged at just a few sources, it is a moral imperative that we act on th at. Life as we know it is bleeding out. But we can see exactly where to act – stop the mega-polluters. YOU just need the courage to do it. Response: No response needed.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6437

Name: M. Toor Organization: Comment: I don't think I have to tell you why this is a critical issue, please protect the citizens of this country! Response: No response needed.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5989
Name: M. Ankelman Organization: Comment: It's your duty to put public health before private wealth. Response: No response needed.275 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6319 Name: O. Tegland Organization: Comment: Why was the EPA formed? Because industry h as proven capable of self-monitoring? Because corporate law puts people before profit? Please. Sound regulation, wise scrutiny. Response: No response needed.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6146 Name: L. Day Organization: Comment: Please enact strong roles to protect us fr om lead in the air. I live in Houston, and I hate the idea that industry can deci de how many toxins they can dump in the air we breathe around here. Our environ ment -- and our lives -- depend on strong Federal rules & enforcement. Response: No response needed.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6466
Name: C. Mathews Organization:
Comment: I don't know all the reasons behind the ch ange from half a ton to 1 ton a year of lead requiring EPA monitoring, but I would assume they were economic. It seems to me that business should monit or its own pollution and the only job of the EPA would be to verify that monitor ing periodically through soil samples in the area, smoke exhaust stack checks at random and testing local stream and other ground water for contamination at most. Scheduled routine testing is the job of business in my mind and the E PA should just conduct random and unannounced tests to verify good steward ship. As long as the EPA is operating within the limits of its power as give n by congress, I think its job is simply to do the most with the least amount of expe nse. Response: As discussed in the preambles to the prop osal and the final rule, the EPA is lowering the emission threshold to better id entify sources that have the potential to exceed the Pb NAAQS. Under the CAA, th e EPA has the authority to require State and local monitoring agencies to c onduct necessary monitoring276 to determine compliance with the Pb NAAQS. Dependin g on state rules, monitoring agencies may be able to delegate this mo nitoring to the private industry, and/or recoup the costs associated with m onitoring through permitting and operating fees.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6498
Name: C. Watkinson Organization: Comment: Lead in our air can't be good. Response: No response needed.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6148
Name: C. Ulbrich Organization: Comment: We must put the needs of the many over the profits of a few. Lead is a known toxin, and our country is an a major health crisis, with ballooning rates of all diseases. Pollution kills Response: No response needed.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6493 Name: B. Cunningham Organization: Comment: I believe the EPA should do everything in it's power to protect the living citizens of the United States from harmful c hemicals. Response: No response needed.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6023

Name: A. Marsot Organization:277 Comment: Letter did not contain any comments. Response: No response needed.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6341
Name: R. Berka Organization: Comment: 2000 years after the Romans poisoned thems elves with lead, we still haven't learned. Response: No response needed.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6016
Name: E. Landels Organization: Comment: Not doing everything we can to reign in po lluted air that will harm our children and their future potentials is suicida l. As a country, we need to stop prioritizing corporate America's short-term goals a nd start looking more towards the nation's long-term interests. Response: No response needed.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5984 Name: L. Squiers Organization: Comment: Why are we being poisoned by corporations? Why don't our regulatory agencies actually regulate these pollute rs and stop corrupt practices? Response: No response needed.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5951 Name: G. Vinson Hellwig Organization: The Michigan Department of Natural Re sources and278 Environment (MDNRE) Comment: The EPA has also been slow in granting Fed eral Equivalent Method (FEM) status to many of the long-established labora tory procedures that have been used by states to analyze lead. As a result, m any states such as Michigan are stockpiling filters collected at 1 T/y sources for later analysis. It is incumbent upon the EPA to address and approve the m any FEM requests made by states before issuing another lead monitoring ma ndate. Response: The EPA has approved 3 new generic FEM fo r use by monitoring agencies. Furthermore, a national contract has been finalized which will allow monitoring agencies to purchase Pb analysis from th is contract if the monitoring agency so chooses.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5946
Name: Arthur N. Marin Organization: Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM)
Comment: The NESCAUM states are concerned about the quality of the national inventories used by EPA as the basis for i ts decisions on lead monitoring. The airport inventory’s emission factor s and activity data have not been reviewed by the states for many years and may be significantly outdated. Some data points are highly suspect. For example, a small airport in the Hamptons (New York) was attributed with 154,000 lan dings and takeoffs. This number is more than 75% of the total flights in and out of Kennedy International Airport in New York City. The lead in ventory for electric generating units (EGUs) is also of concern. Our und erstanding is that this inventory was developed based on a 1998 Utility Rep ort to Congress.2 Several data points in this inventory have been changed wit hout consultation with the states and are also highly suspect. Prior to finali zing this rule, EPA must undertake a robust and detailed evaluation and revi ew of the airport and EGU lead inventories. This should include quality assur ance, quality control, and comprehensive state review. Response: The EPA has been working with States to i mprove the emission inventories, and will continue to do so as monitori ng agencies work to implement these new requirements.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5946
Name: Arthur N. Marin279 Organization: Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM)
Comment: The NESCAUM states recommend that EPA allo w modeling to be used in conjunction with monitoring data to better determine nonattainment areas. The intent is to ensure that areas can be de signated nonattainment in those cases where robust monitoring data are lackin g. Response: These regulatory revisions deal with moni toring requirements, and do not affect other NAAQS implementation issues suc h as the use of modeling data to determine nonattainment areas. As such, thi s question is not germane to this rule making.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5946
Name: Arthur N. Marin Organization: Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM) Comment: NESCAUM encourages EPA to develop and impl ement a national lead reduction strategy that addresses all sources of environmental lead, including but not limited to aviation gasoline, con sumer products, metals recycling, steel production, lead acid battery disp osal, tire weights, fishing sinkers and weighted lures, paint, lead shot, and d iesel lube oil. Such an approach would greatly speed the process for minimi zing lead exposure nationwide. Response: No response needed.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5947
Name: Therese M. Cirone Organization: RSR Corporation (RSR) Comment: The five-year span before such a waiver mu st be renewed appears too long in light of the stated goals of the curren t rulemaking. RSR believes that a yearly testing program to support the continuatio n of any such waiver would be desirable. We encourage EPA to revise the above- quoted subsection in Appendix D to provide that lead emission sources, s uch as secondary lead smelters, perform annual testing of lead emissions from process sources and "sanitary" source (for example, bag houses and high -efficiency particulate-absorbing (HEPA) filters controlling em issions from buildings) to confirm that the 0.5 TPY limit is not exceeded befo re a previously authorized waiver may continue in effect. The absence of an an nual check- up opens the280 door to undiscovered, ongoing NAAQS exceedances, co unter to the purposes of EPA’s revised monitoring proposal. Response: The EPA did not propose changes to the ex isting waiver provisions. As such, this comment is not germane to this rule m aking.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5949
Name: Teresa Marks Organization: Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ)
Comment: Due to current constrains on staff and fi scal resources, ADEQ is reluctant to require additional monitoring unless t he arguments for doing so are pervasive. EPA should assure support in the form o f 103 grant funds for any additional monitoring effort that would be required by these revisions to the rule. Response: EPA notes that fiscal year 2010 STAG fund ing has been made available for the purpose of supporting new lead mo nitoring equipment purchases related to this final rule. EPA also note s that additional 2011 STAG funding was proposed to support "core" programs whi ch can include activities such as ambient monitoring. EPA will work with the Regional Offices, NACAA, and monitoring agencies to develop a plan fo r allocating these funds to the new monitoring needs related to this final r ule as well as recent NAAQS revisions.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5950
Name: Laurel L. Kroack Organization: Illinois Environmental Protection Age ncy Comment: EPA Needs to Provide State and Local Agenc ies Flexibility in Implementing Lead Monitoring Requirements, Response: The EPA has attempted to include as much flexibility as possible in these Pb monitoring requirements.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5950
Name: Laurel L. Kroack Organization: Illinois Environmental Protection Age ncy281 Comment: EPA Must Fully Fund the Monitoring Program and Support Economically Sustainable Monitoring Strategies, Response: EPA notes that fiscal year 2010 STAG fund ing has been made available for the purpose of supporting new lead mo nitoring equipment purchases related to this final rule. EPA also note s that additional 2011 STAG funding was proposed to support "core" programs whi ch can include activities such as ambient monitoring. EPA will work with the Regional Offices, NACAA, and monitoring agencies to develop a plan fo r allocating these funds to the new monitoring needs related to this final r ule as well as recent NAAQS revisions.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5957 Name: Jerry Call Organization: American Foundry Society (AFS)
Comment: EPA Must Use the Best Data Available for L ocating Ambient Lead Monitors In making determinations for locating sour ce-oriented lead monitors, EPA should rely on the best data available. Specifi cally, this would be the best data available that are more representative of the foundry industry’s current practices and actual lead emissions, rather than re ly on the 2002 and 2005 NEI lead emissions data. Accordingly, facilities potent ially subject to the proposed revised monitoring requirements should be allowed t o present data that would accurately reflect current practices at the foundry and actual lead emissions. Ideally, these data could include emissions testing results, where available. Other options for demonstrating potential lead emis sions could include the amount of lead found in scrap supplies, recent emis sions factors that reflect current practices implemented to reduce lead emissi ons, bag house dust analysis, or historical data that may reflect the t rend of lead emission reductions. The most critical factor is to use data that are representative of the foundry’s current practices that are designed to, a nd have resulted in, reductions of lead emissions. Response: Monitoring agencies are encouraged to use the most recent and accurate estimates of Pb emissions when determining the applicability of these monitoring requirements.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6271

Name: N. Orr Organization:282 Comment: EPA such toxins should be regulated to the maximum extent under the law. It's a perversion of justice that these co mpanies are not monitored. Regulatory agencies have become a joke. Response: No response needed.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6061
Name: T. Martinez Organization: Comment: EPA: please use strict regulation on those companies emitting lead into America's air. We need it now, with no delay. Response: No response needed.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6226

Name: S. Connor Organization: Comment: We need to find a way to put the health an d well being of human beings and the planet that sustains life above econ omics. If we fail to make that shift in our priorities, life on earth will deterio rate and economic profit will lose its value anyway. We simply must make this shift. Response: No response needed.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-6064 Name: Myra C. Reece Organization: South Carolina Department of Health a nd Environmental Control Comment: For the past three decades, the Department has assumed primary responsibility of implementing the Clean Air Act (C AA) for the State of South Carolina as it relates to the National Ambient A' Q uality Standards (NAAQS). States are charged with carrying out requirements o f the CAA and with developing State Implementation Plans (SIPS) that o utline how air pollution will be controlled to meet the NAAQS. The SIP proce ss has become burdensome, complicated, and costly, and EPA has no t provided the funding to state and local air agencies that is needed to deve lop and implement new283 requirement . We urge EPA to agencies face. The Dep artment is already under-funded for existing mandates and continues t face acute fiscal difficulties that severely strain our resources. Continuing redu ctions on funding are necessitated a critical evaluation of our current a ir quality program. Difficult options are being considered in order to focus our limited resources on the operation and maintenance of an air quality monitor ing program that both objectively and accurately documents the ambient ai r quality and provides the necessary oversight needed to protect the public he alth for all of our urban and rural populations, as w 11 as any sensitive ecosyst ems that could be negatively impacted. The Department cannot continue to absorb unfunded costs associated with this and other network expansions, such as the near roadway nitrogen oxide monitoring network. Without additional fundin g, the Department will find it impossible to m t these additional Response: EPA notes that fiscal year 2010 STAG fund ing has been made available for the purpose of supporting new lead mo nitoring equipment purchases related to this final rule. EPA also note s that additional 2011 STAG funding was proposed to support "core" programs whi ch can include activities such as ambient monitoring. EPA will work with the Regional Offices, NACAA, and monitoring agencies to develop a plan fo r allocating these funds to the new monitoring needs related to this final r ule as well as recent NAAQS revisions.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5953 Name: Sandra F. Veazey Organization: Florida Department of Environmental P rotection Comment: Whatever monitoring is required. the divis ion requests that EPA provide §l03 grant funds for the capital costs asso ciated with the lead monitoring increases. This proposal will require th e division to establish 13 additional lead sites. This expense has not been pa rt of our fiscal planning and comes at a time when increases in funding are unlik ely to come from state sources. In addition to the capital cost for these monitors. their operation will require additional funding. The division requests t hat EPA provide additional 105 grant funds for Response: EPA notes that fiscal year 2010 STAG fund ing has been made available for the purpose of supporting new lead mo nitoring equipment purchases related to this final rule. EPA also note s that additional 2011 STAG funding was proposed to support "core" programs whi ch can include activities such as ambient monitoring. EPA will work with the Regional Offices, NACAA, and monitoring agencies to develop a plan fo r allocating these funds to the new monitoring needs related to this final r ule as well as recent NAAQS revisions.284 Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5954 Name: Mary Munn Organization: Fond du Lac Reservation
Comment: The costs of the additional ambient air le ad monitoring should be borne by the facilities that produce the emissions. Response: Historically, the responsibility to monit or ambient air has been placed on the states, and not on private industry. States and local monitoring agencies may be able to pass the expense of monitor ing on to private industry through various fees or permitting requirements, ho wever, that is not for the EPA to decide.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5951
Name: Avinash Kar Organization: Natural Resources Defense Council (NR DC) et al. Comment: When performed with robust lead emissions data, modeling can help agencies evaluate the impact of factors such as met eorology and terrain on ambient lead concentrations. However, poorly rated emission factors or other unreliable lead emissions estimates should not be u sed in modeling for waiver requests. The EPA has previously acknowledged in th e context of waivers “the possibility that faulty or uncertain modeling demon strations or past monitoring programs would be the basis for not monitoring sour ces that are the most likely to cause NAAQS violations.” Proposed Rule for Natio nal Ambient Air Quality Standards for Lead, 73 Fed. Reg. 29184, 29263 (May 20, 2008). Given this acknowledgement and the range of reliability in lea d emissions estimates, EPA must place further limitations on the grant of waiv ers in order to protect public health with an adequate margin of safety. EPA shoul d limit the use of lead emissions estimates in modeling for waiver requests to site specific emissions data or independently verified lead emissions estim ates in light of its statement that many NEI lead emission estimates can be improv ed with site specific data. 73 Fed. Reg. at 67026. Without these limitations to prevent the use of unreliable lead emission estimates, monitoring requirements ma y inappropriately be waived for sources that contribute to a maximum amb ient air lead concentration of over 50 percent of the NAAQS. In addition, altho ugh the EPA has stated that the “purposes of the monitoring network would be un dermined if multiple sources in a single area were able to receive waive rs, with the result that no monitor was required even though Pb concentrations in the area were in excess of 50 percent of the standard,” 73 Fed. Reg. at 670 27, it has not added any limitations in the waiver provision to ensure that this will not occur. Instead, in the preamble to the final rule, EPA states that it “expects that Regional285 Administrators, in deciding whether to grant waiver s, will take into account whether other waivers have been granted or sought f or sources in the same area, and whether the cumulative emissions of the sources in the area warrant at least one monitor being sited.” 73 Fed. Reg. at 67027 (em phasis added). EPA should also add language to the waiver provision to ensure that lead concentrations from multiple sources adding up to more than 50% of the NAAQS are adequately captured, especially given EPA’s proposa l to dispense with population-based monitors in urban areas. In light of that proposal, it is even more important to ensure that waivers do not preven t urban areas from being adequately monitored. The other limitations on waiv ers suggested above will also help achieve this objective by strengthening h ealth-protections in the Response: The EPA did not propose changes to the ex isting waiver provisions. As such, this comment is not germane to this rule m aking.

Comment ID: OAR-2006-0735-5951 Name: G. Vinson Hellwig Organization: The Michigan Department of Natural Re sources and Environment (MDNRE) Comment: 1. Any new monitoring mandate must be acc ompanied by a requisite level of new funding. Given EPA's recent proposed revisions to the ambient air monitoring requirements for nitrogen di oxide, sulfur dioxide, ozone and school air toxics, it is unlikely that the MDNR E will be able to conduct the air monitoring laid out in this proposal for lead u nless the EPA provides 100 percent funding. This new funding should be in the form of a Section 103 grant so as not to require a state match. The MDNRE simpl y does not have surplus resources available to continue to establish new si tes in these financially constrained times. Response: EPA notes that fiscal year 2010 STAG fund ing has been made available for the purpose of supporting new lead mo nitoring equipment purchases related to this final rule. EPA also note s that additional 2011 STAG funding was proposed to support "core" programs whi ch can include activities such as ambient monitoring. EPA will work with the Regional Offices, NACAA, and monitoring agencies to develop a plan fo r allocating these funds to the new monitoring needs related to this final r ule as well as recent NAAQS revisions.